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.
By Victor Ojewale, Suresh Venkatasubramanian
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...
By Sadia Asif, Mohammad Mohammadi Amiri, Momin Abbas, Tejaswini Pedapati, Prasanna Sattigeri
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:2607. 19449v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Evaluation frameworks for tool-augmented LLM agents focus overwhelmingly on capability metrics or explicit tool crashes, leaving silent infrastructure failures and HTTP 200 responses with empty, null, or malformed payloads largely unaudited.
By Aarushi Singh
The paper introduces PACT, a benchmark designed to evaluate how well enterprise AI assistants follow compliance rules when faced with various pressures such as persistent users or hurried managers. PACT covers twelve regulated domains and forty-eight realistic multi‑turn scenarios, pairing each rule with a shortcut that violates it and applying different pressures across wording and system‑prompt modes. Using PACT, the authors profile six metrics of compliance and aggregate them into a PACTScore, revealing significant variability among 22 LLM models and that even top performers misapply rules 6–10% of the time, with user pressure increasing violations by 65% on average.
By Mika Okamoto, Ansel Kaplan Erol
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.
By Youwei Feng, Yitong Zhang, Yuetong Liu, Jia Li