arXiv AI

JANUS: Foreseeing Latent Risk for Long-Horizon Agent Safety

arXiv:2607. 19913v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent safety is moving from content moderation toward preventing operational failures before tool-using agents act.

arXiv AI
Aug 7

DreamGuard: Efficient Runtime Guardrail for LLM Agents via Risk-Aware World Model

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.

By Wenhao Lin, Chenyu Yu, Xingwei Lin, Sicong Cao, Xiang Chen, Lei Xue, Le Yu, Letian Sha, Chunming Wu
arXiv AI
4d ago

SafeCoEvo: Co-Evolving Safety Harnesses and Guards for LLM Agents at Test-Time

SafeCoEvo is a test‑time framework that co‑evolves safety harnesses and guards for large language model agents. It uses a short‑term S‑Harness to quickly externalize recent runtime experience into explicit safety knowledge, and a long‑term GuardVPO to internalize accumulated experience into parametric risk‑judgment capabilities. This dual adaptation improves safety and task success, reducing unsafe outcomes by 10.05% and increasing task success by 12.15% over the strongest baseline.

By Yu Cheng, Yongkang Hu, Shuaijie Ma, Zhihang Lin, Weicheng Meng, Jingyang Qiao, Jiuan Zhou, Yushuo Zhang, Yihang Chen, Weilin Luo, Kun Shao, Dong Li, Zhizhong Zhang, Yuan Xie, Zhaoxia Yin
arXiv AI
Jun 6

From Risk Classification to Action Plan Remediation: A Guardrail Feedback Driven Framework for LLM Agents

arXiv:2606. 05805v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based guardrails typically safeguard agents by evaluating proposed actions or inputs before execution, producing safety signals such as binary allow/deny decisions, risk categories, and/or explanatory rationales about potential policy violations.

By Yuhao Sun, Jiacheng Zhang, Shaanan Cohney, Zhexin Zhang, Feng Liu, Xingliang Yuan
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
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 22

Beyond Task Completion: Training Capable and Safe Computer-Use Agents

The paper introduces SCOPE, a method that post‑trains computer‑use agents to balance task completion with safety by conditioning actions on environmental risk. It combines supervised fine‑tuning on three trajectory types—capability demonstrations, safe continuations, and explicit refusals—followed by reinforcement learning to improve performance. Experiments starting from Qwen3.5‑9B show that SCOPE‑RL achieves high task success and attack‑avoidance rates, outperforming other agents on OSWorld and OS‑BLIND benchmarks.

By Zeyu Kang, Zhenyun Yin, Yang Zhang, Shan He, Shanzhe Lei, Yanjiu Zhong, Xinquan Chen, Yuhong Wang
arXiv AI
Sep 3

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%.

By Qinghua Mao, Wanying Qu, Dadi Guo, Leitao Yuan, Qingyu Liu, Yu Li, Guanxu Chen, Yanwei Fu, Xi Lin, Xia Hu, Dongrui Liu
arXiv AI
Sep 15

Evaluation Metrics for Safe Reinforcement Learning

The paper introduces new evaluation metrics for safe reinforcement learning that go beyond average safety guarantees by examining how often and how severely safety bounds are violated, consistency across tasks and bounds, and the relationship between training-time and final policy behavior. It also proposes a safety tier system for categorizing algorithms and presents empirical safety evaluations on multiple navigation tasks. The authors recommend reporting aggregate metrics, distributional data, and task‑specific results together, and provide an open‑source suite, SafeRLEval, to facilitate reliable safety assessment.

By Lindsay Spoor, Aske Plaat, Thomas Moerland
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 30

Forecasting Trajectory-Level Safety Risks in Black-Box Multi-Turn Interactions

arXiv:2607. 26820v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) evolve from standalone assistants into autonomous agents, ensuring their safety requires shifting beyond pointwise risk assessment to understand how risks emerge and unfold over long-horizon trajectories.

By Shi Lin, Peng Qian, Dinghao Liu, Renjie Sun, Sifan Wu, Dezhang Kong, Chenpei Wang, Xun Wang
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 AI
Sep 17

HINTBench: Horizon-agent Intrinsic Non-attack Trajectory Benchmark

HINTBench is a new benchmark for evaluating agents’ intrinsic risk, comprising 596 trajectories (400 synthetic risky, 136 synthetic safe, 30 real risky, 30 real safe) with an average length of 24 steps. It supports three tasks—risk detection, risk-step localization, and intrinsic failure-type identification—using a unified five-constraint taxonomy. Experiments show a large performance gap: while large language models can detect risky trajectories, they score below 37 on strict-F1 for risk-step localization, and existing guard models transfer poorly to this setting.

By Jiacheng Wang, Jinchang Hou, Fabian Wang, Ping Jian, Chenfu Bao, Zhonghou Lv