arXiv AI

SafeEvolve: Harness-Policy Co-Evolution from Agent Experience for Safety Alignment

SafeEvolve is an experience-driven framework that co‑evolves a harness and policy to align large‑language‑model agents with safety goals. It uses completed on‑policy trajectories to update safety prompts and hierarchical skills, then applies a two‑stage SFT‑RL training loop that bootstraps the policy with the evolved harness and refines it through verifier‑augmented rewards. Experiments on agentic safety benchmarks show that SafeEvolve improves the safety‑utility tradeoff, achieving a three‑fold reduction in ASR on AgentDojo for Qwen3.5‑4B while increasing benign utility from 59.79% to 61.86%.

arXiv AI
Aug 11

SHE: Trajectory-driven Safety Harness Evolution for LLM Agents

arXiv:2608. 09885v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The safety of large language model (LLM) agents depends not only on model weights but also on the agent harness that manages context, memory, tools, permissions, and runtime control.

By Wanying Qu, Qinghua Mao, Yu Li, Jiyao Liu, Xin Zhang, Dadi Guo, Yanxu Zhu, Qingyu Liu, Leitao Yuan, Xi Lin, Shanfeng Zhu, Yanwei Fu, Jing Shao, Xia Hu, Dongrui Liu
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 28

The Cold-Start Safety Gap in LLM Agents

The paper investigates whether tool‑calling large language model agents maintain consistent safety throughout a conversation. It finds that agents are most vulnerable at the very start of a session, with safety improving significantly after completing a few regular agentic tasks—a phenomenon termed the cold‑start safety gap. The authors introduce the Safety Over Depth for Agents (SODA) benchmark to systematically study this effect, evaluate multiple models, and demonstrate that warming up agents with regular tasks before deployment enhances safety while preserving utility.

By Chung-En Sun, Linbo Liu, Tsui-Wei Weng
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 20

SafeBranch: Branch-Pair Safety Alignment for Embodied Agents

Vision-language-model-based embodied agents can complete instructed tasks but often violate safety constraints in the process, a problem recently framed as interactive safety. Training such agents to act safely is difficult, since safety and task success are distinct objectives, and safety arises only at a small number of safety-critical steps within a trajectory.

arXiv AI
Aug 19

HarnessRisk: A Lifecycle-Oriented Benchmark for Agent Harness Safety

HarnessRisk is a lifecycle-oriented benchmark for evaluating safety in agent harnesses that manage tools, extensions, state, permissions, and external actions. It defines six operational phases—Harness Configuration, Capability Extension, Runtime Operation, State Persistence, Action Control, and Incident Recovery—and includes 128 sandboxed cases pairing benign user objectives with adversarial instructions. Across three harnesses, six language models, and 14 configurations, attack success rates vary from 12.6% to 80.9%, with the most vulnerable phase being Harness Configuration. "whyItMatters":"The benchmark demonstrates that safety failures can arise in multiple harness responsibilities and that even explicit risk detection does not guarantee safe action, underscoring the need for comprehensive evaluation across model and harness configurations."

By Yajing Bai, Jinhao Duan, Jie Peng, Xianfeng Wu, Sijia Liu, Song Wang, Tianlong Chen