The Agentic Company OS: Substrate Inversion for Sustained Enterprise Agent Deployment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.13334v1
• Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 09:48:43 GMT
• Title: The Agentic Company OS: Substrate Inversion for Sustained Enterprise Agent Deployment
• Abstract summary: We argue that failure modes share a common architectural root: agents reason over data structured for human operators.<n>This position paper proposes that companies deploying agents in sustained operation should rebuild their cognitive substrate.
• Score: 1.2744523252873352
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Enterprise AI agents often succeed in a demonstration and then stall once they must operate day after day. An industry report estimates that most pilots never reach production and that deployed systems rarely retain feedback or improve over time, while agent benchmarks show single-run successes masking unreliable repetition. We argue that these failure modes share a common architectural root: agents reason over data structured for human operators and traditional applications, not for the language models that power them. This position paper proposes that companies deploying agents in sustained operation should rebuild their cognitive substrate, the shared environment agents read as working context, around representations matched to that reasoning surface, isolating schema translation to the action boundary. Markdown is the instantiation available today, not a proven agent-native primitive. Two mechanisms ground the argument: context-bandwidth asymmetry, the gap between one-pass reading of connected prose and field-by-field typed access that strips relations; and cross-loop coupling, the claim that action, skill, and policy loops compound only if they share one substrate. A four-layer framework (Data, Knowledge, Intelligence, Governance) operationalizes the position, with a Sync Agent enforcing the action boundary and a per-skill trust gradient, making governance and auditability structural properties of the substrate. The position revives the shared-substrate tradition of classical multi-agent systems under LLM-era economics. We analyze the main objections and risks, including indirect prompt injection on the compile path, and outline a research agenda for evaluating substrates directly.

Related papers

• Poisoning Agentic Alpha: Adversarial Vulnerabilities Across Roles and Architectures in Multi-Agent Trading Systems [103.90831279037094]
  LLM-based multi-agent trading systems are moving rapidly from research prototypes to live deployments that control real assets.<n>A corrupted signal can propagate to the final decision and translate into realized financial loss.<n>We present the first systematic empirical study in the financial domain to characterize how an adversarial signal enters a multi-agent trading system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-25T05:07:37Z)
• ScrambleToolBench: Agents Search Exhaustively Even When Their Own Map Points to the Next Step [74.83535434786145]
  We introduce ScrambleToolBench, an interactive terminal benchmark designed to isolate behavioral reasoning.<n>The benchmark requires agents to uncover hidden tool behaviors entirely through trial-and-error interaction.<n>Our evaluation of state-of-the-art language models reveals that successful initial discovery does not translate into robust adaptation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T15:07:46Z)
• Adversarial Attacks in Multi-Agent LLM Pipelines: Unveiling Structural Vulnerabilities in Agentic AI Architectures [4.053243845971823]
  Multi-agent LLM pipelines orchestrate specialized language model agents into structured where intermediate outputs are passed across agents to solve complex tasks.<n>This design introduces a security gap absent in single-agent settings: once an agent accepts adversarial content, it is propagated as trusted input throughout the pipeline.<n>We argue that this vulnerability stems from the absence of boundary verification, a security primitive that enforces explicit validation of data as it crosses inter-agent boundaries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-01T15:35:58Z)
• Operational Hallucination and Safety Drift in AI Agents [0.3823356975862005]
  Large language models (LLMs) serving as planners in tool-using autonomous agents introduce dynamic reliability risks in multi-turn execution.<n>This paper empirically characterizes two observed failure modes across multiple state-of-the-art LLMs: Safety Drift and Operational Hallucination.<n>We propose an Action-Aware Supervision Layer - a lightweight, plug-and-play architectural blueprint incorporating intent-action consistency checks, state tracking, and forced termination primitives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-20T17:01:50Z)
• Isolation as a First-Class Principle for LLM-Agent System Safety: Concepts, Taxonomy, Challenges and Future Directions [41.376270124786195]
  Safety is no longer only about input-output content alignment. It also concerns system behavior and real-world execution outcomes.<n>This makes it hard to explain why failures such as prompt injection, tool misuse, and memory poisoning often share the same structural cause, and how they spread through an agent workflow.<n>We organize the literature with a boundary-centric taxonomy of five boundaries: user-agent, agent-tool, agent-execution, agent-agent, and system-environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-14T06:25:35Z)
• Taming "Zombie'' Agents: A Markov State-Aware Framework for Resilient Multi-Agent Evolution [50.50276752935017]
  AgentRevive is a Markov state-aware framework for resilient multi-agent evolution.<n>Our approach dynamically manages agent collaboration through soft state transitions.<n>It significantly reduces token consumption through state-aware agent scheduling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T09:38:18Z)
• 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)
• The Landscape of Prompt Injection Threats in LLM Agents: From Taxonomy to Analysis [24.51410516475904]
  This SoK presents a comprehensive overview of the Prompt Injection (PI) landscape, covering attacks, defenses, and their evaluation practices.<n>We introduce AgentPI, a new benchmark designed to systematically evaluate agent behavior under context-dependent interaction settings.<n>We show that many defenses appear effective under existing benchmarks by suppressing contextual inputs, yet fail to generalize to realistic agent settings where context-dependent reasoning is essential.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-11T02:47:10Z)
• Agentic Spatio-Temporal Grounding via Collaborative Reasoning [80.83158605034465]
  Temporal Video Grounding aims to retrieve thetemporal tube of a target object or person in a video given a text query.<n>We propose the Agentic Spatio-Temporal Grounder (ASTG) framework for the task of STVG towards an open-world and training-free scenario.<n>Specifically, two specialized agents SRA (Spatial Reasoning Agent) and TRA (Temporal Reasoning Agent) constructed leveraging on modern Multimoal Large Language Models (MLLMs)<n>Experiments on popular benchmarks demonstrate the superiority of the proposed approach where it outperforms existing weakly-supervised and zero-shot approaches by a margin
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-10T10:16:27Z)
• 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)

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.