mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

PEAR: Planner-Executor Agent Robustness Benchmark

arXiv 2510.07505 ↗First posted 8 Oct 2025cs.LGcited by 5

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Model (LLM)-based Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) have emerged as a powerful paradigm for tackling complex, multi-step tasks across diverse domains. However, despite their impressive capabilities, MAS remain susceptible to adversarial manipulation. Existing studies typically examine isolated attack surfaces or specific scenarios, leaving a lack of holistic understanding of MAS vulnerabilities. To bridge this gap, we introduce PEAR, a benchmark for systematically evaluating both the utility and vulnerability of planner-executor MAS. While compatible with various MAS architectures, our benchmark focuses on the planner-executor structure, which is a practical and widely adopted design. Through extensive experiments, we find that (1) a weak planner degrades overall clean task performance more severely than a weak executor; (2) while a memory module is essential for the planner, having a memory module for the executor does not impact the clean task performance; (3) there exists a trade-off between task performance and robustness; and (4) attacks targeting the planner are particularly effective at misleading the system. These findings offer actionable insights for enhancing the robustness of MAS and lay the groundwork for principled defenses in multi-agent settings.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 34 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Oct 2025.

Builds on

34 of 56 references.

Closest ancestors · 10

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025A-MemGuard: A Proactive Defense Framework for LLM-Based Agent Memory29 Sep
  2. 2025AgentAuditor: Human-Level Safety and Security Evaluation for LLM Agents31 May
  3. 2025Red-Teaming LLM Multi-Agent Systems via Communication Attacks20 Feb
  4. 2025Unveiling Privacy Risks in LLM Agent Memory17 Feb
  5. 2024Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents19 Dec
  6. 2024RedCode: Risky Code Execution and Generation Benchmark for Code Agents12 Nov
  7. 2024AgentPoison: Red-teaming LLM Agents via Poisoning Memory or Knowledge Bases17 Jul
  8. 2024AgentDojo: A Dynamic Environment to Evaluate Prompt Injection Attacks and Defenses for LLM Agents19 Jun
  9. 2024PsySafe: A Comprehensive Framework for Psychological-based Attack, Defense, and Evaluation of Multi-agent System Safety22 Jan
  10. 2023Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandbox25 Sep

Other references · 24

  1. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  2. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,182
  3. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
  4. 2023CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Language Model Societycited by 1,395
  5. 2022Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Modelscited by 832
  6. 2025Agent Laboratory: Using LLM Agents as Research Assistantscited by 425
  7. 2023Multi-Agent Collaboration: Harnessing the Power of Intelligent LLM Agentscited by 333
  8. 2025Plan-and-Act: Improving Planning of Agents for Long-Horizon Taskscited by 195
  9. 2024Agent S: An Open Agentic Framework that Uses Computers Like a Humancited by 187
  10. 2025MultiAgentBench: Evaluating the Collaboration and Competition of LLM agentscited by 178
  11. 2023ADaPT: As-Needed Decomposition and Planning with Language Modelscited by 177
  12. 2024PrivacyLens: Evaluating Privacy Norm Awareness of Language Models in Actioncited by 171
12 more
  1. 2024The Good and The Bad: Exploring Privacy Issues in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)cited by 159
  2. 2024WebPilot: A Versatile and Autonomous Multi-Agent System for Web Task Execution with Strategic Explorationcited by 101
  3. 2024On the Resilience of LLM-Based Multi-Agent Collaboration with Faulty Agentscited by 99
  4. 2024Agent-E: From Autonomous Web Navigation to Foundational Design Principles in Agentic Systemscited by 81
  5. 2024BadChain: Backdoor Chain-of-Thought Prompting for Large Language Modelscited by 80
  6. 2024MultiAgent Collaboration Attack: Investigating Adversarial Attacks in Large Language Model Collaborations via Debatecited by 56
  7. 2024OSCAR: Operating System Control via State-Aware Reasoning and Re-Planningcited by 38
  8. 2023Digital Deception: Generative Artificial Intelligence in Social Engineering and Phishingcited by 27
  9. 2025Division-of-Thoughts: Harnessing Hybrid Language Model Synergy for Efficient On-Device Agentscited by 25
  10. 2024Dynamic Planning for LLM-based Graphical User Interface Automationcited by 19
  11. 2024MALMM: Multi-Agent Large Language Models for Zero-Shot Robotics Manipulationcited by 19
  12. 2025Multi-Faceted Studies on Data Poisoning can Advance LLM Developmentcited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.

5 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025TAMAS: Benchmarking Adversarial Risks in Multi-Agent LLM Systems
  2. 2026PlanFlip: Attacking Multi-Agent LLM Systems via Planning-Phase Prompt Injection
  3. 2025Architecting Resilient LLM Agents: A Guide to Secure Plan-then-Execute Implementations
  4. 2026Beyond the Leaderboard: A Synthesis of Tool-Use, Planning, and Reasoning Failures in Large Language Model Agents
  5. 2026GuardianAgentBench: Where Agents Fail and How to Guard Them
  6. 2026LPS-Bench: Benchmarking Safety Awareness of Computer-Use Agents in Long-Horizon Planning under Benign and Adversarial Scenarios
  7. 2026SIMMER: Benchmarking Latent Failures in LLM Executable Planning with a World Model
  8. 2024SafeAgentBench: A Benchmark for Safe Task Planning of Embodied LLM Agents