AgentArmor: A Framework, Evaluation, \& Mitigation of Coding Agent Failures
arXiv:2606. 19380v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Software engineering and deployment are increasingly being delegated to AI coding agents.
arXiv:2606. 19380v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Software engineering and deployment are increasingly delegated to AI coding agents.
arXiv:2606. 19380v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Software engineering and deployment are increasingly being delegated to AI coding agents.
arXiv:2607. 25890v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI coding agents are being adopted at historic speed, yet security and risk concerns remain the primary barrier to scaling agentic AI across organizations.
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.
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."
arXiv:2607. 13705v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) evolve into autonomous agents, the need for unified evaluation infrastructure becomes critical.
arXiv:2601.12449v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: AI agents are autonomous systems that combine LLMs with external tools to solve complex tasks. While such tools extend capability, improper t...
AI coding agents are being adopted at historic speed, yet security and risk concerns remain the primary barrier to scaling agentic AI across organizations. Existing security controls for coding agents are not systematically distributed to engineering teams, and vendor-native solutions introduce ecosystem dependencies that may not suit every deployment context.
As Large Language Models (LLMs) evolve into autonomous agents, the need for unified evaluation infrastructure becomes critical. However, current evaluation pipelines remain highly fragmented and tightly coupled, hindering reproducibility and causing redundant engineering.
arXiv:2606. 02965v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As large language models gain tool access and are deployed as autonomous agents capable of editing records, executing transactions, and modifying infrastructure, we still evaluate them based on the sole metric of task completion.
arXiv:2605. 10907v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The dominant paradigm for AI agents is an "on-the-fly" loop in which agents synthesize plans and execute actions within seconds or minutes in response to user prompts.
arXiv:2607. 03968v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed as IDE-integrated coding agents that decompose tasks, generate and edit files, run code, and refine outputs over many turns.
arXiv:2607. 22569v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Coding agents are increasingly integrated into system operations, where their tool use can directly modify project artifacts, execution environments, and the underlying system.