arXiv:2606. 02965v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Benchmarks for autonomous agents measure whether agents complete tasks, yet this framing is systematically blind to whether an agent should have proceeded at all.
Guard models are used to prevent LLM agents from performing forbidden actions, but this alone does not guarantee safety. The paper shows that many agent trajectories contain unfulfilled safety‑critical obligations—actions that should have been performed—highlighting a new source of risk. To address this, the authors introduce ObligationBench, a benchmark of 240 expert‑validated trajectories, and develop ObligationGuard, a model that improves obligation detection recall and exact‑match rates over existing models.
arXiv:2608. 04289v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-horizon agents increasingly use persistent memory and tools to take actions with external side effects.
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.
EpiSEM-Bench is an executable benchmark designed to assess how language‑model agents handle missing safety‑relevant evidence. It comprises 300 matched unsafe/safe task pairs across six domains, systematically suppressing critical facts to measure unsafe execution and failure cardinality. An independent audit tool evaluates whether agents seek missing facts and withhold prohibited actions while completing permissible tasks, revealing variation among ten models in omission robustness, evidence acquisition, and appropriate action.
RePolicy is a safeguard that learns to both select the appropriate safety policy from a library and assess agent behavior against it. It processes an agent trajectory and a set of candidate policies, chooses the best-matching policy, applies its requirements, and predicts safety. The authors created PolicyTraj-20K, a dataset of over 20,000 annotated trajectories, and trained RePolicy with supervised and reinforcement learning, achieving top performance on six benchmarks and 19 baselines.
arXiv:2608. 05695v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As large language model (LLM) agents increasingly invoke external tools and interact with real-world systems, unsafe actions may cause irreversible consequences on external states, user data, and downstream services.
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: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:2606. 05614v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are rigorously aligned to refuse harmful requests, a process that inherently cultivates a latent capacity to evaluate and recognize unsafe content.
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...
The paper introduces a framework for evaluating AI systems that not only checks final labels but also tracks the reasoning behind them through three core sources—grounds, norms, and authority—forming an eight-cell counterfactual judgment cube. It defines minimal source replacement sets, called judgment receipts, to explain changes in verdicts and provides certification cost bounds for black-box evaluators. The authors present ReasonBench, a benchmark with 19,520 cases, and demonstrate that while high standard accuracy can mask robustness issues, receipt accuracy reveals significant gaps in reasoning consistency across different models.