# From Literal to Liberal: A Meta-Prompting Framework for Eliciting Human-Aligned Exception Handling in Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.12864 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.12864/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 12 of its 16 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 Oct 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [Learning to summarize from human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.01325/) (2020)
- [A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.11432/) (2023)
- [Concrete Problems in AI Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.06565/) (2016)
- [The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.07864/) (2023)
- [Logic-LM: Empowering Large Language Models with Symbolic Solvers for Faithful Logical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.12295/) (2023)
- [Agentic AI for Scientific Discovery: A Survey of Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.08979/) (2025)
- [Beyond Instruction Following: Evaluating Inferential Rule Following of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.08440/) (2024)
- [Teaching AI to Handle Exceptions: Supervised Fine-Tuning with Human-Aligned Judgment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.02976/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [You Don't Need Prompt Engineering Anymore: The Prompting Inversion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.22251/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being deployed as the reasoning engines for agentic AI systems, yet they exhibit a critical flaw: a rigid adherence to explicit rules that leads to decisions misaligned with human common sense and intent. This "rule-rigidity" is a significant barrier to building trustworthy autonomous agents. While prior work has shown that supervised fine-tuning (SFT) with human explanations can mitigate this issue, SFT is computationally expensive and inaccessible to many practitioners. To address this gap, we introduce the Rule-Intent Distinction (RID) Framework, a novel, low-compute meta-prompting technique designed to elicit human-aligned exception handling in LLMs in a zero-shot manner. The RID framework provides the model with a structured cognitive schema for deconstructing tasks, classifying rules, weighing conflicting outcomes, and justifying its final decision. We evaluated the RID framework against baseline and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting on a custom benchmark of 20 scenarios requiring nuanced judgment across diverse domains. Our human-verified results demonstrate that the RID framework significantly improves performance, achieving a 95% Human Alignment Score (HAS), compared to 80% for the baseline and 75% for CoT. Furthermore, it consistently produces higher-quality, intent-driven reasoning. This work presents a practical, accessible, and effective method for steering LLMs from literal instruction-following to liberal, goal-oriented reasoning, paving the way for more reliable and pragmatic AI agents.