Check Yourself Before You Wreck Yourself: Selectively Quitting Improves LLM Agent Safety
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.16492v2
- Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2025 10:26:51 GMT
- Title: Check Yourself Before You Wreck Yourself: Selectively Quitting Improves LLM Agent Safety
- Authors: Vamshi Krishna Bonagiri, Ponnurangam Kumaragurum, Khanh Nguyen, Benjamin Plaut,
- Abstract summary: Large Language Model (LLM) agents increasingly operate in complex environments with real-world consequences.<n>We propose using "quitting" as a simple yet effective behavioral mechanism for LLM agents to recognize and withdraw from situations where they lack confidence.
- Score: 2.7030665672026846
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: As Large Language Model (LLM) agents increasingly operate in complex environments with real-world consequences, their safety becomes critical. While uncertainty quantification is well-studied for single-turn tasks, multi-turn agentic scenarios with real-world tool access present unique challenges where uncertainties and ambiguities compound, leading to severe or catastrophic risks beyond traditional text generation failures. We propose using "quitting" as a simple yet effective behavioral mechanism for LLM agents to recognize and withdraw from situations where they lack confidence. Leveraging the ToolEmu framework, we conduct a systematic evaluation of quitting behavior across 12 state-of-the-art LLMs. Our results demonstrate a highly favorable safety-helpfulness trade-off: agents prompted to quit with explicit instructions improve safety by an average of +0.39 on a 0-3 scale across all models (+0.64 for proprietary models), while maintaining a negligible average decrease of -0.03 in helpfulness. Our analysis demonstrates that simply adding explicit quit instructions proves to be a highly effective safety mechanism that can immediately be deployed in existing agent systems, and establishes quitting as an effective first-line defense mechanism for autonomous agents in high-stakes applications.
Related papers
- Learning When to Act or Refuse: Guarding Agentic Reasoning Models for Safe Multi-Step Tool Use [6.622648583261088]
Agentic language models must plan, call tools, and execute long-horizon actions where a single misstep can cause irreversible harm.<n>We introduce MOSAIC, a framework that aligns agents for safe multi-step tool use by making safety decisions explicit and learnable.<n>We show that MOSAIC reduces harmful behavior by up to 50%, increases harmful-task refusal by over 20% on injection attacks, cuts privacy leakage, and preserves or improves benign task performance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-03T17:59:35Z) - Steering Externalities: Benign Activation Steering Unintentionally Increases Jailbreak Risk for Large Language Models [62.16655896700062]
Activation steering is a technique to enhance the utility of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We show that it unintentionally introduces critical and under-explored safety risks.<n>Experiments reveal that these interventions act as a force multiplier, creating new vulnerabilities to jailbreaks and increasing attack success rates to over 80% on standard benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-03T12:32:35Z) - STAC: When Innocent Tools Form Dangerous Chains to Jailbreak LLM Agents [38.755035623707656]
This paper introduces Sequential Tool Attack Chaining (STAC), a novel multi-turn attack framework that exploits agent tool use.<n>We apply our framework to automatically generate and evaluate 483 STAC cases, featuring 1,352 sets of user-agent-environment interactions.<n>Our evaluations show that state-of-the-art LLM agents, including GPT-4.1, are highly vulnerable to STAC, with attack success rates (ASR) exceeding 90% in most cases.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-30T00:31:44Z) - Agent Safety Alignment via Reinforcement Learning [29.759393704688986]
We propose the first unified safety-alignment framework for tool-using agents.<n>We introduce a tri-modal taxonomy, including benign, malicious, and sensitive for both user prompts and tool responses.<n>Our results show that safety and effectiveness can be jointly optimized.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-07-11T02:34:16Z) - AGENTSAFE: Benchmarking the Safety of Embodied Agents on Hazardous Instructions [64.85086226439954]
We present SAFE, a benchmark for assessing the safety of embodied VLM agents on hazardous instructions.<n> SAFE comprises three components: SAFE-THOR, SAFE-VERSE, and SAFE-DIAGNOSE.<n>We uncover systematic failures in translating hazard recognition into safe planning and execution.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-17T16:37:35Z) - AgentAlign: Navigating Safety Alignment in the Shift from Informative to Agentic Large Language Models [23.916663925674737]
Previous work has shown that current LLM-based agents execute numerous malicious tasks even without being attacked.<n>We propose AgentAlign, a novel framework that leverages abstract behavior chains as a medium for safety alignment data synthesis.<n>Our framework enables the generation of highly authentic and executable instructions while capturing complex multi-step dynamics.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-29T03:02:18Z) - SafeAgent: Safeguarding LLM Agents via an Automated Risk Simulator [77.86600052899156]
Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents are increasingly deployed in real-world applications.<n>We propose AutoSafe, the first framework that systematically enhances agent safety through fully automated synthetic data generation.<n>We show that AutoSafe boosts safety scores by 45% on average and achieves a 28.91% improvement on real-world tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-23T10:56:06Z) - SafeMLRM: Demystifying Safety in Multi-modal Large Reasoning Models [50.34706204154244]
Acquiring reasoning capabilities catastrophically degrades inherited safety alignment.<n>Certain scenarios suffer 25 times higher attack rates.<n>Despite tight reasoning-answer safety coupling, MLRMs demonstrate nascent self-correction.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-09T06:53:23Z) - Representation Bending for Large Language Model Safety [27.842146980762934]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful tools, but their inherent safety risks pose significant challenges.<n>This paper introduces RepBend, a novel approach that fundamentally disrupts the representations underlying harmful behaviors in LLMs.<n>RepBend achieves state-of-the-art performance, outperforming prior methods such as Circuit Breaker, RMU, and NPO, with up to 95% reduction in attack success rates.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-02T09:47:01Z) - Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents [72.92604341646691]
We introduce Agent-SafetyBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate the safety of large language models (LLMs)<n>Agent-SafetyBench encompasses 349 interaction environments and 2,000 test cases, evaluating 8 categories of safety risks and covering 10 common failure modes frequently encountered in unsafe interactions.<n>Our evaluation of 16 popular LLM agents reveals a concerning result: none of the agents achieves a safety score above 60%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-19T02:35:15Z) - SafeAgentBench: A Benchmark for Safe Task Planning of Embodied LLM Agents [58.65256663334316]
We present SafeAgentBench -- the first benchmark for safety-aware task planning of embodied LLM agents in interactive simulation environments.<n>SafeAgentBench includes: (1) an executable, diverse, and high-quality dataset of 750 tasks, rigorously curated to cover 10 potential hazards and 3 task types; (2) SafeAgentEnv, a universal embodied environment with a low-level controller, supporting multi-agent execution with 17 high-level actions for 9 state-of-the-art baselines; and (3) reliable evaluation methods from both execution and semantic perspectives.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-17T18:55:58Z) - Safety Margins for Reinforcement Learning [53.10194953873209]
We show how to leverage proxy criticality metrics to generate safety margins.
We evaluate our approach on learned policies from APE-X and A3C within an Atari environment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-25T16:49:54Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.