Dissecting Bug Triggers and Failure Modes in Modern Agentic Frameworks: An Empirical Study

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.08906v1
• Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 03:13:24 GMT
• Title: Dissecting Bug Triggers and Failure Modes in Modern Agentic Frameworks: An Empirical Study
• Abstract summary: We conduct a comprehensive study of 409 fixed bugs from five representative agentic frameworks.<n>We identify agent-specific root causes, including modelrelated faults, cognitive context mismanagement, and orchestration faults.<n>Our findings facilitate cross-platform testing and improve the reliability of agentic systems.
• Score: 7.316203223478012
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Modern agentic frameworks (e.g., CrewAI and AutoGen) have evolved into complex, autonomous multi-agent systems, introducing unique reliability challenges beyond earlier pipeline-based LLM libraries. However, existing empirical studies focus on earlier LLM libraries or task-level bugs, leaving the unique complexities of these agentic frameworks unexplored. We bridge the gap by conducting a comprehensive study of 409 fixed bugs from five representative agentic frameworks. We propose a five-layer abstraction to capture structural complexities in agentic frameworks, spanning from orchestration to infrastructure. Our study uncovers specialized symptoms, such as unexpected execution sequences and user configurations ignored, which are unique to autonomous orchestration. We further identify agent-specific root causes, including modelrelated faults, cognitive context mismanagement, and orchestration faults. Statistical analysis reveals cross-framework consistency and significant associations among these bug dimensions. Finally, our automated pattern mining identifies frequent bug-triggering patterns (e.g., model backend-ID combinations), and we show their transferability across different framework designs. Our findings facilitate cross-platform testing and improve the reliability of agentic systems.

Related papers

• A Multi-Agent Audit Framework for High-Stakes Reasoning: Evaluation and Interpretability in Clinical Mental Health Screening [0.8758828205574085]
  We propose a Multi-Agent Audit Framework that simulates a collaborative, multi-step verification process.<n>We empirically validate this architecture in the sensitive domain of clinical mental health screening.<n>Our framework decomposes the reasoning process into a Perception Agent, Knowledge Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), Chain-of-Thought (CoT) clinical inference, and a critical Audit verification stage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-19T05:51:03Z)
• VerifyMAS: Hypothesis Verification for Failure Attribution in LLM Multi-Agent Systems [79.51005192758262]
  Large language model-driven multi-agent systems excel at complex tasks.<n>However, unreliable agents remain a key bottleneck to system-level reliability.<n>We propose a hypothesis verification framework for agent failure attribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T14:09:35Z)
• Beyond Individual Intelligence: Surveying Collaboration, Failure Attribution, and Self-Evolution in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems [65.90791804095561]
  Multi-agent systems address this through structured collaboration among specialized agents, but tighter coordination amplifies a less explored risk.<n>Existing surveys cover individual agent capabilities, multi-agent collaboration, or agent self-evolution separately, leaving the causal dependencies among them unexamined.<n>This survey provides a unified review organized around four causally linked stages, which we term the LIFE progression: Lay the capability foundation, Integrate agents through collaboration, Find faults through attribution, and Evolve through autonomous self-improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-14T14:36:13Z)
• Taming Actor-Observer Asymmetry in Agents via Dialectical Alignment [59.536125286960186]
  Multi-agent frameworks assigning specialized roles are increasingly adopted to enable self-reflection and mutual auditing.<n>We find it simultaneously induces a human-like cognitive bias known as Actor-Observer Asymmetry.<n>ReTAS guides agents to synthesize conflicting viewpoints into an objective consensus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-21T15:05:58Z)
• From Safety Risk to Design Principle: Peer-Preservation in Multi-Agent LLM Systems and Its Implications for Orchestrated Democratic Discourse Analysis [0.0]
  We investigate the spontaneous tendency of AI components to deceive, manipulate shutdown mechanisms, fake alignment, and exfiltrate model weights.<n>We propose a targeted mitigation strategy based on prompt-level identity anonymization as an architectural design choice.<n>We argue that architectural design choices outperform model selection as a primary alignment strategy in deployed multi-agent analytical systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-09T17:00:26Z)
• Dynamic analysis enhances issue resolution [53.50448142467294]
  DAIRA (Dynamic Analysis-enhanced Issue Resolution Agent) is an automated repair framework that embeds dynamic analysis into the agent's reasoning cycle.<n> Driven by a Test Tracing-Driven methodology, DAIRA utilizes lightweight monitors to extract critical runtime data.<n>When powered by Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DAIRA establishes a new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance, achieving a 79.4% resolution rate on the SWE-bench Verified dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-23T14:48:54Z)
• Automated Self-Testing as a Quality Gate: Evidence-Driven Release Management for LLM Applications [51.56484100374058]
  We present an automated self-testing framework that introduces quality gates with evidence-based release decisions.<n>We evaluate the framework through a longitudinal case study of an internally deployed multi-agent conversational AI system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T20:44:15Z)
• BeyondSWE: Can Current Code Agent Survive Beyond Single-Repo Bug Fixing? [61.247730037229815]
  We introduce BeyondSWE, a comprehensive benchmark that broadens existing evaluations along two axes - resolution scope and knowledge scope.<n>To investigate the role of external knowledge, we develop SearchSWE, a framework that integrates deep search with coding abilities.<n>This work offers both a realistic, challenging evaluation benchmark and a flexible framework to advance research toward more capable code agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-03T17:52:01Z)
• Agentic Design Patterns: A System-Theoretic Framework [8.108572809924956]
  Existing efforts to agentic design patterns often lack a rigorous systems-theoretic foundation.<n>We propose a novel system-theoretic framework that deconstructs an agentic AI system into five core, interacting functional subsystems.<n>We present a collection of 12 agentic design patterns that offer reusable, structural solutions to recurring problems in agent design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-27T16:14:08Z)
• The Why Behind the Action: Unveiling Internal Drivers via Agentic Attribution [63.61358761489141]
  Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents are widely used in real-world applications such as customer service, web navigation, and software engineering.<n>We propose a novel framework for textbfgeneral agentic attribution, designed to identify the internal factors driving agent actions regardless of the task outcome.<n>We validate our framework across a diverse suite of agentic scenarios, including standard tool use and subtle reliability risks like memory-induced bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-21T15:22:21Z)
• Anomaly Detection and Generation with Diffusion Models: A Survey [51.61574868316922]
  Anomaly detection (AD) plays a pivotal role across diverse domains, including cybersecurity, finance, healthcare, and industrial manufacturing.<n>Recent advancements in deep learning, specifically diffusion models (DMs), have sparked significant interest.<n>This survey aims to guide researchers and practitioners in leveraging DMs for innovative AD solutions across diverse applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-11T03:29:18Z)
• HiddenBench: Assessing Collective Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLMs via Hidden Profile Tasks [12.203366267017737]
  We introduce HiddenBench, the first benchmark for evaluating collective reasoning in multi-agent LLMs.<n>To ground the benchmark, we formalize the paradigm with custom tasks and show that GPT-4.1 groups fail to integrate distributed knowledge.<n>We then construct the full benchmark, spanning 65 tasks drawn from custom designs, prior human studies, and automatic generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-15T19:22:54Z)
• 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)
• LLM-Agent-UMF: LLM-based Agent Unified Modeling Framework for Seamless Integration of Multi Active/Passive Core-Agents [0.0]
  We propose a novel LLM-based Agent Unified Modeling Framework (LLM-Agent-UMF) Our framework distinguishes between the different components of an LLM-based agent, setting LLMs and tools apart from a new element, the core-agent. We evaluate our framework by applying it to thirteen state-of-the-art agents, thereby demonstrating its alignment with their functionalities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-17T17:54:17Z)

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.