FLARE: Agentic Coverage-Guided Fuzzing for LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.05289v1
• Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2026 00:47:37 GMT
• Title: FLARE: Agentic Coverage-Guided Fuzzing for LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems
• Abstract summary: Multi-Agent LLM Systems (MAS) have been adopted to automate complex human tasks by breaking down tasks into subtasks.<n>MAS applications frequently encounter failures, including infinite loops and failed tool invocations.<n>Traditional software testing techniques are ineffective in detecting such failures due to the lack of LLM agent specification, the large behavioral space of MAS, and semantic-based correctness judgment.<n>This paper presents FLARE, a novel testing framework tailored for MAS. FLARE takes the source code of MAS as input and extracts specifications and behavioral spaces from agent definitions.
• Score: 9.562231408217281
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Multi-Agent LLM Systems (MAS) have been adopted to automate complex human workflows by breaking down tasks into subtasks. However, due to the non-deterministic behavior of LLM agents and the intricate interactions between agents, MAS applications frequently encounter failures, including infinite loops and failed tool invocations. Traditional software testing techniques are ineffective in detecting such failures due to the lack of LLM agent specification, the large behavioral space of MAS, and semantic-based correctness judgment. This paper presents FLARE, a novel testing framework tailored for MAS. FLARE takes the source code of MAS as input and extracts specifications and behavioral spaces from agent definitions. Based on these specifications, FLARE builds test oracles and conducts coverage-guided fuzzing to expose failures. It then analyzes execution logs to judge whether each test has passed and generates failure reports. Our evaluation on 16 diverse open-source applications demonstrates that FLARE achieves 96.9% inter-agent coverage and 91.1% intra-agent coverage, outperforming baselines by 9.5% and 1.0%. FLARE also uncovers 56 previously unknown failures unique to MAS.

Related papers

• When Agents Do Not Stop: Uncovering Infinite Agentic Loops in LLM Agents [7.986500985812644]
  We call this problem Infinite Agentic Loops (IALs)<n>IALs arise from the interaction between agent logic, framework semantics, runtime observations, and termination mechanisms.<n>We propose IAL-Scan, a static analysis tool for detecting IAL failures in real-world LLM agent projects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-02T03:14:27Z)
• FAMA: Failure-Aware Meta-Agentic Framework for Open-Source LLMs in Interactive Tool Use Environments [60.3427704389541]
  Large Language Models are being increasingly deployed as the decision-making core of autonomous agents.<n>Yet, in conversational benchmarks, these agents frequently fail due to the cascading effects of incorrect decision-making.<n>We present the Failure-Aware Meta-Agentic framework to tackle these challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-28T02:21:53Z)
• Ask or Assume? Uncertainty-Aware Clarification-Seeking in Coding Agents [4.301199871195023]
  Large Language Model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed in open-ended domains like software engineering.<n>We evaluate the clarification-seeking abilities of LLM agents on an underspecified variant of SWE-bench Verified.<n>We propose an uncertainty-aware multi-agent scaffold that explicitly decouples underspecification detection from code execution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-27T09:56:26Z)
• The Bitter Lesson of Diffusion Language Models for Agentic Workflows: A Comprehensive Reality Check [54.08619694620588]
  We present a comprehensive evaluation of dLLMs across two distinct agentic paradigms: Embodied Agents and Tool-Calling Agents.<n>Our results on Agentboard and BFCL reveal a "bitter lesson": current dLLMs fail to serve as reliable agentic backbones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-19T11:45:39Z)
• DoVer: Intervention-Driven Auto Debugging for LLM Multi-Agent Systems [48.971606069204825]
  DoVer is an intervention-driven debug framework for large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems.<n>It augments hypothesis generation with active verification through targeted interventions.<n>DoVer flips 18-28% of failed trials into successes, achieves up to 16% milestone progress, and validates or refutes 30-60% of failure hypotheses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-07T09:23:48Z)
• AgenTracer: Who Is Inducing Failure in the LLM Agentic Systems? [71.21547572568655]
  AgenTracer-8B is a lightweight failure tracer trained with multi-granular reinforcement learning.<n>On the Who&When benchmark, AgenTracer-8B outperforms giant proprietary LLMs like Gemini-2.5-Pro and Claude-4-Sonnet by up to 18.18%.<n>AgenTracer-8B delivers actionable feedback to off-the-shelf multi-agent systems like MetaGPT and MaAS with 4.8-14.2% performance gains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-03T13:42:14Z)
• AGENTIF: Benchmarking Instruction Following of Large Language Models in Agentic Scenarios [51.46347732659174]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated advanced capabilities in real-world agentic applications.<n>AgentIF is the first benchmark for systematically evaluating LLM instruction following ability in agentic scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T17:31:10Z)
• Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systems [50.29939179830491]
  Failure attribution in LLM multi-agent systems remains underexplored and labor-intensive.<n>We develop and evaluate three automated failure attribution methods, summarizing their corresponding pros and cons.<n>The best method achieves 53.5% accuracy in identifying failure-responsible agents but only 14.2% in pinpointing failure steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-30T23:09:44Z)
• Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail? [87.90075668488434]
  We introduce MAST-Data, a comprehensive dataset of 1600+ annotated traces collected across 7 popular MAS frameworks.<n>We build the first Multi-Agent System Failure taxonomy (MAST)<n>We leverage MAST and MAST-Data to analyze failure patterns across models (GPT4, Claude 3, Qwen2.5, CodeLlama) and tasks (coding, math, general agent)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T19:04:38Z)
• Defining and Detecting the Defects of the Large Language Model-based Autonomous Agents [31.126001253902416]
  We present the first study focused on identifying and detecting defects in LLM Agents.<n>We collected and analyzed 6,854 relevant posts from StackOverflow to define 8 types of agent defects.<n>Our results show that Agentable achieved an overall accuracy of 88.79% and a recall rate of 91.03%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-24T11:54:14Z)
• AgentFL: Scaling LLM-based Fault Localization to Project-Level Context [11.147750199280813]
  This paper presents AgentFL, a multi-agent system based on ChatGPT for automated fault localization.<n>By simulating the behavior of a human developer, AgentFL models the FL task as a three-step process, which involves comprehension, navigation, and confirmation.<n>The evaluation on the widely used Defects4J-V1.2.0 benchmark shows that AgentFL can localize 157 out of 395 bugs within Top-1.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-25T01:58:19Z)

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.