Determinants and Limits of LLM Security-Tool Orchestration: A Study with HexStrike-AI
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.02873v1
- Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2026 02:20:04 GMT
- Title: Determinants and Limits of LLM Security-Tool Orchestration: A Study with HexStrike-AI
- Abstract summary: We run 86 picoCTF challenges across seven categories and three difficulty tiers, under three tool-access regimes and three model/client configurations.<n>We apply corrections to existing tools, agent-behavior changes, and eleven new capability tools, and re-run the previously-unsuccessful trials.<n>The overall solve rate rises from 55.4% to 72.0%, and every configuration improves significantly.
- Score: 2.2616066835313253
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
- Abstract: Large language model agents driving security tool suites over the Model Context Protocol are increasingly common. Yet the factors that bound their capability remain poorly characterized: how much depends on the model versus the client that drives it, whether constraining the agent to the orchestrator's own tools helps, and where capability is limited by reasoning rather than by missing tools. Using HexStrikeAI, an open-source orchestrator that exposes 150+ tools, as a testbed, we follow a methodology that evaluates the system, diagnoses its failures, and applies targeted improvements. We run 86 picoCTF challenges across seven categories and three difficulty tiers, under three tool-access regimes and three model/client configurations (774 trials). We then apply corrections to existing tools, agent-behavior changes, and eleven new capability tools, and re-run the previously-unsuccessful trials. The diagnosis isolates the driving client as a first-order factor for a fixed model (a 2.1 * gap between two DeepSeek clients) and a monotonic difficulty gradient, with the largest gains in the mid tier. The overall solve rate rises from 55.4% to 72.0%, and every configuration improves significantly (paired McNemar p < 0.001, non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals). The residual failures are reasoning- or environment-bound rather than missing-tool. A 60-run stability sub-study finds single-run verdicts reproducible (17/20 unanimous). We discuss what the results imply for how such orchestrators should be evaluated, and we are explicit about the limits: the study uses a single benchmark, the fixes were tuned on the same challenges they were evaluated on, and the client effect is demonstrated for one model only, so its generality to other models remains a hypothesis.
Related papers
- GuardianAgentBench: Where Agents Fail and How to Guard Them [1.5223648595073074]
We present GuardianAgentBench, a benchmark of 580 scenarios across six domains evaluated on three production-ready frameworks.<n>We show that even the strongest configuration achieves only 74.8% overall accuracy and expose two distinct failure regimes.<n>Our guardrail implementation consistently outperforms system-prompt-based defenses across all models, recovering 19.9% of failures at a false positive rate of just 0.5%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-23T07:05:05Z) - Design and Evaluation of Multi-Agent AI Oracle Systems for Prediction Market Resolution [0.0]
Prediction markets aggregate collective intelligence to forecast uncertain events.<n>Existing oracle systems tradeoff fast but brittle automation against accurate but costly human arbitration.<n>We evaluate whether multi-agent LLM architectures can improve oracle resolution accuracy over single-model baselines.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-29T03:44:19Z) - CAX-Agent: A Lightweight Agent Harness for Reliable APDL Automation [7.355373109826612]
This paper presents the architecture of CAX-Agent, a lightweight agent harness for MAPDL automation.<n>We evaluate three recovery strategies (no_recovery, rule_only, and model_only) on 50 standard structural benchmarks.<n>Model_only achieves the best completion rate (0.9267), task score (3.59/4), total score (9.16/10), and zero-intervention rate (0.84), outperforming rule_only (0.7733, 3.17/4, 7.03/10, 0.00) and no_recovery (0.6933, 2.74/4, 5.60/10, 0.00) with large effect sizes
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-12T14:46:34Z) - MIRROR: A Hierarchical Benchmark for Metacognitive Calibration in Large Language Models [0.0]
MIRROR is a benchmark that evaluates whether large language models can use self-knowledge to make better decisions.<n>We evaluate 16 models from 8 labs across approximately 250,000 evaluation instances.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-15T08:41:12Z) - Three Roles, One Model: Role Orchestration at Inference Time to Close the Performance Gap Between Small and Large Agents [0.4666493857924357]
We study whether inference-time scaffolding alone, without any additional training compute, can improve the performance of a small model in complex multi-step environments.<n>We evaluate Qwen3-8B on the AppWorld benchmark under both full-precision and 4-bit quantized configurations.<n>On full-precision inference, our scaffolded 8B model surpasses DeepSeek-Coder 33B Instruct (7.1%) from the original AppWorld evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-13T13:40:33Z) - Claw-Eval: Toward Trustworthy Evaluation of Autonomous Agents [66.97968363332465]
We introduce Claw-Eval, an end-to-end evaluation suite addressing all three gaps in agent benchmarks.<n>Claw-Eval comprises 300 human-verified tasks spanning 9 categories across three groups.<n>Every agent action is recorded through three independent evidence channels.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-07T17:43:18Z) - AgentProcessBench: Diagnosing Step-Level Process Quality in Tool-Using Agents [50.481033105867205]
We introduce AgentProcessBench, the first benchmark dedicated to evaluating step-level effectiveness in realistic, tool-augmented trajectories.<n>The benchmark comprises 1,000 diverse trajectories and 8,509 human-labeled step annotations with 89.1% inter-annotator agreement.<n>It features a ternary labeling scheme to capture exploration and an error propagation rule to reduce labeling ambiguity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-15T16:13:58Z) - Capable but Unreliable: Canonical Path Deviation as a Causal Mechanism of Agent Failure in Long-Horizon Tasks [0.38991526486631006]
We argue that many reliability failures are caused by drift from a task's latent solution structure, not capability failures.<n>We establish this causally using a natural experiment that holds model capability and task difficulty fixed by construction.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-22T02:37:57Z) - Towards a Science of Scaling Agent Systems [79.64446272302287]
We formalize a definition for agent evaluation and characterize scaling laws as the interplay between agent quantity, coordination structure, modelic, and task properties.<n>We derive a predictive model using coordination metrics, that cross-validated R2=0, enabling prediction on unseen task domains.<n>We identify three effects: (1) a tool-coordination trade-off: under fixed computational budgets, tool-heavy tasks suffer disproportionately from multi-agent overhead, and (2) a capability saturation: coordination yields diminishing or negative returns once single-agent baselines exceed 45%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-09T06:52:21Z) - One Model to Critique Them All: Rewarding Agentic Tool-Use via Efficient Reasoning [54.580646706013965]
Reward models (RMs) play a critical role in aligning large language models with human preferences.<n>We introduce ToolRM, a family of lightweight generative RMs tailored for general tool-use scenarios.<n>To build these models, we propose a novel pipeline that constructs pairwise preference data using rule-based scoring and multidimensional sampling.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-30T06:08:27Z) - SOPBench: Evaluating Language Agents at Following Standard Operating Procedures and Constraints [59.645885492637845]
SOPBench is an evaluation pipeline that transforms each service-specific SOP code program into a directed graph of executable functions.<n>Our approach transforms each service-specific SOP code program into a directed graph of executable functions and requires agents to call these functions based on natural language SOP descriptions.<n>We evaluate 18 leading models, and results show the task is challenging even for top-tier models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-11T17:53:02Z) - TACRED Revisited: A Thorough Evaluation of the TACRED Relation
Extraction Task [80.38130122127882]
TACRED is one of the largest, most widely used crowdsourced datasets in Relation Extraction (RE)
In this paper, we investigate the questions: Have we reached a performance ceiling or is there still room for improvement?
We find that label errors account for 8% absolute F1 test error, and that more than 50% of the examples need to be relabeled.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-04-30T15:07:37Z)
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.