When Agents Do Not Stop: Uncovering Infinite Agentic Loops in LLM Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01641v1
• Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2026 03:14:27 GMT
• Title: When Agents Do Not Stop: Uncovering Infinite Agentic Loops in LLM Agents
• Abstract summary: 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.
• Score: 7.986500985812644
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: LLM agents increasingly rely on iterative execution to solve tasks through planning, tool use, state updates, and agent collaboration. While this design enables flexible automation, it also creates a new class of failures: an agent may repeatedly execute model calls, tools, workflow transitions, or agent handoffs when the feedback path is not effectively bounded. We call this problem Infinite Agentic Loops (IALs). IALs are not ordinary programming loops; they arise from the interaction between agent logic, framework semantics, runtime observations, and termination mechanisms. Such failures can amplify a single request into long running model and tool execution, causing cost exhaustion, model denial of service, context growth, and repeated external side effects. We propose IAL-Scan, a static analysis tool for detecting IAL failures in real-world LLM agent projects. IAL-Scan abstracts heterogeneous agent code into a framework independent Agent IR, builds an Agentic Loop Dependence Graph (ALDG) to recover explicit and framework induced feedback paths, and checks whether these paths can repeatedly reach costly or state growing operations without an effective bound. We evaluate IAL-Scan on 6,549 LLM agent repositories. It reports 74 potential findings, among which manual review confirms 68 IAL failures across 47 projects, achieving 91.9% precision.

Related papers

• Leveraging Trajectory Graphs for Pre-Execution Error Diagnosis in Agentic LLM Systems [47.66236392009794]
  Large Language Model(LLM)-based agents have demonstrated exceptional performance across a wide range of complex interactive tasks.<n>We propose textitTrajectory Graph Copilot, a novel framework that acts as a copilot'' for LLM agents by diagnosing potential action errors before they are executed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-29T20:14:43Z)
• AgentEscapeBench: Evaluating Out-of-Domain Tool-Grounded Reasoning in LLM Agents [35.967227261886435]
  AgentEscapeBench tests whether agents can infer, execute, and revise novel tool-use procedures under explicit long-range dependency constraints.<n>Experiments with sixteen LLM agents and human participants show that performance drops sharply as dependency depth increases.<n>Trajectory analysis attributes model failures mainly to breakdowns in long-range state tracking, clue adherence, and intermediate-result propagation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T15:59:27Z)
• Beyond the Black Box: Interpretability of Agentic AI Tool Use [0.0]
  We introduce a mechanistic-interpretability toolkit built on Sparse Autoencoders and linear probes.<n>The framework reads model states before each action and infers both whether a tool is needed and how consequential the next tool action is likely to be.<n>We train the probes on multi-step trajectories from the NVIDIA Nemotron function-calling dataset and apply the same workflow to GPT-OSS 20B and Gemma 3 27B models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T19:47:30Z)
• AgentRaft: Automated Detection of Data Over-Exposure in LLM Agents [40.88941407116349]
  We present AgentRaft, the first automated framework for detecting Data Over-Exposure (DOE) risks in Large Language Model (LLM) agents.<n>We evaluate AgentRaft on a testing environment of 6,675 real-world agent tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-08T09:40:54Z)
• 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)
• DeepAgent: A General Reasoning Agent with Scalable Toolsets [111.6384541877723]
  DeepAgent is an end-to-end deep reasoning agent that performs autonomous thinking, tool discovery, and action execution.<n>To address the challenges of long-horizon interactions, we introduce an autonomous memory folding mechanism that compresses past interactions into structured episodic, working, and tool memories.<n>We develop an end-to-end reinforcement learning strategy, namely ToolPO, that leverages LLM-simulated APIs and applies tool-call advantage attribution to assign fine-grained credit to the tool invocation tokens.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T16:24:01Z)
• Where LLM Agents Fail and How They can Learn From Failures [62.196870049524364]
  Large Language Model (LLM) agents have shown promise in solving complex, multi-step tasks.<n>They amplify vulnerability to cascading failures, where a single root-cause error propagates through subsequent decisions.<n>Current systems lack a framework that can comprehensively understand agent error in a modular and systemic way.<n>We introduce the AgentErrorTaxonomy, a modular classification of failure modes spanning memory, reflection, planning, action, and system-level operations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T18:20:27Z)
• 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)
• UDora: A Unified Red Teaming Framework against LLM Agents by Dynamically Hijacking Their Own Reasoning [17.448966928905733]
  Large Language Model (LLM) agents equipped with external tools have become increasingly powerful for complex tasks.<n>We present UDora, a unified red teaming framework designed for LLM agents that dynamically hijacks the agent's reasoning processes to compel malicious behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T21:30:28Z)

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.