arXiv:2610.03153v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Workspace agents combine large language models with execution harnesses to perform stateful, multi-step tasks that access or modify external resource...
arXiv:2607. 29254v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents extend large language models (LLMs) with external tools, enabling them to perform complex tasks and translate model outputs into consequential real-world actions.
arXiv:2605. 06890v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI agents are promising for high-stakes enterprise workflows, but dependable deployment remains limited because tool-use failures are difficult to diagnose and control.
Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly operate over long-horizon interactions involving tool use, persistent state, evolving authorization, and external environment feedback. In such settings,...
arXiv:2609.16305v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly operate over long-horizon interactions involving tool use, persistent state, evolving authorization, and...
arXiv:2610.35188v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models increasingly act through code, modifying repositories, executing programs, and interacting with services in agent form. Their a...
arXiv:2608. 14590v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents increasingly perform irreversible real-world actions, including database updates, API calls, file operations, and autonomous use of tools.
arXiv:2606. 18356v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using language-model agents introduce security failures that go beyond unsafe text: they can disclose protected objects, write persistent memory, send messages, modify databases, or trigger harmful code and tool effects.
arXiv:2609.36201v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Computer-use agents (CUAs), while capable of completing computer tasks in everyday and professional workflows, can cause unintended harm even under b...
arXiv:2606. 11063v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI control protocols oversee untrusted models by monitoring their actions and modifying potentially unsafe steps, often using a trusted model.
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.
LPS-Bench is a benchmark designed to evaluate the safety awareness of computer‑use agents (CUAs) in long‑horizon planning tasks that involve tool workflows. It uses a template‑guided multi‑agent pipeline to generate user instructions, simulated toolkits, and case‑specific safety criteria, followed by human review, allowing scalable expansion without building separate application environments. The benchmark includes 570 cases from 65 scenarios across seven task domains and nine planning‑risk types, and an LLM‑based evaluator assesses tool choices, arguments, and responses throughout execution. Evaluations of 13 LLM agents show persistent safety failures in both benign and adversarial settings, with prompt‑based interventions providing only model‑dependent improvements.