The paper introduces SARA, a framework that separates action induction from runtime authorization in tool‑augmented LLM agents. By treating these as distinct roles, SARA uses an Action Probe to record action provenance and only authorizes tool calls that align with the user objective and past successful executions. Experiments on AgentDojo and AgentDyn show that SARA reduces action‑to‑side‑effect risk to below 0.63% while preserving task performance.
arXiv:2607. 20827v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents choose tools and arguments from context that mixes user requests, tool outputs, retrieved records, memory, and untrusted text.
arXiv:2606. 04990v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-based agents increasingly solve complex tasks by interacting with external tools, retrieval systems, memory modules, environments, and other agents.
arXiv:2606. 04104v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agent systems execute through runtimes with very different control points: local coding tools, framework SDKs, managed agent platforms, API gateways, and observer-only integrations.
The paper introduces Aegis, a runtime governance system for agentic AI that treats model outputs as action proposals and mediates them through a trusted decision layer before tool execution. Aegis evaluates proposals against active policy, resolves provenance server‑side, fails closed under uncertainty, and routes selected cases through a Senate‑style settlement process. In a sandbox evaluation across 6,300 rows, Aegis prevented all governed mock‑tool applications and risky side‑effect completions, preserving provenance and quorum evidence for all settled cases.
arXiv:2609.00052v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Commercial LLM APIs advertise a specific foundation model, but the served backbone may be silently substituted, quantized, or wrapped, for example to...
arXiv:2606. 09692v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Delegation-scoped execution is not identifiable from standard observables: audit logs and execution traces can be identical under multiple incompatible delegation assignments.
arXiv:2607. 18485v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are starting to take on routine work in high-performance computing (HPC), including monitoring Slurm jobs, diagnosing failed builds, inspecting simulation output, and coordinating scientific workflows.
arXiv:2607. 13716v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic AI systems increasingly act through heterogeneous runtimes: local coding hooks, SDK tools, browser automation, managed-agent traces, API gateways, and workflow engines.
arXiv:2607. 24625v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Autonomous LLM agents processing mixed-confidentiality data face severe security risks from prompt injection attacks and reasoning errors.
arXiv:2607. 25364v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-using agents expose structured calls but commonly attach free-form rationales.
The paper introduces a post‑training framework that teaches a 4B‑parameter language model to exercise task‑conditioned authority in executable terminal and Model Context Protocol (MCP) environments. By auditing each action across six risk dimensions with deterministic verifiers and optimizing for task‑specific excess‑privilege values, the authors achieve 98.48% safe success and reduce excess‑authority errors from 4.56% to 0.79% on held‑out tasks. The study also demonstrates capability retention, prompt‑directed improvement, and generalization over a 400‑task continuation test.
arXiv:2606. 28061v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have increasingly moved from standalone text generation systems to agents that invoke external tools, access environments, and execute multi-step tasks.