# Evaluating Implicit Regulatory Compliance in LLM Tool Invocation via Logic-Guided Synthesis

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.08196 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.08196/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 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 19 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 Jan 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Agent threats, guardrails and governance](https://mlsanity.com/agents/agent-threats-guardrails-and-governance/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 19 of 19)

- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16789/) (2023)
- [HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04249/) (2024)
- [Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandbox](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.15817/) (2023)
- [AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.09024/) (2024)
- [Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.14470/) (2024)
- [Evaluation and Benchmarking of LLM Agents: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.21504/) (2025)
- [ShieldAgent: Shielding Agents via Verifiable Safety Policy Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.22738/) (2025)
- [MCP-Bench: Benchmarking Tool-Using LLM Agents with Complex Real-World Tasks via MCP Servers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.20453/) (2025)
- [ToolSword: Unveiling Safety Issues of Large Language Models in Tool Learning Across Three Stages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10753/) (2024)
- [Data-Efficient Learning of Natural Language to Linear Temporal Logic Translators for Robot Task Specification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08006/) (2023)
- [RuleArena: A Benchmark for Rule-Guided Reasoning with LLMs in Real-World Scenarios](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.08972/) (2024)
- [DARG: Dynamic Evaluation of Large Language Models via Adaptive Reasoning Graph](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.17271/) (2024)
- [ETHIC: Evaluating Large Language Models on Long-Context Tasks with High Information Coverage](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.16848/) (2024)
- [LLM-based HSE Compliance Assessment: Benchmark, Performance, and Advancements](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22959/) (2025)
- [TAI3: Testing Agent Integrity in Interpreting User Intent](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.07524/) (2025)
- [A Theory of Response Sampling in LLMs: Part Descriptive and Part Prescriptive](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11005/) (2024)
- [Beyond Knowledge to Agency: Evaluating Expertise, Autonomy, and Integrity in Finance with CNFinBench](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.09506/) (2025)
- [Evaluating LLMs on Sequential API Call Through Automated Test Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.09481/) (2025)

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

- [The Model Says Walk: How Surface Heuristics Override Implicit Constraints in LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.29025/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The integration of large language models (LLMs) into autonomous agents has enabled complex tool use, yet in high-stakes domains, these systems must strictly adhere to regulatory standards beyond simple functional correctness. However, existing benchmarks often overlook implicit regulatory compliance, thus failing to evaluate whether LLMs can autonomously enforce mandatory safety constraints. To fill this gap, we introduce LogiSafetyGen, a framework that converts unstructured regulations into Linear Temporal Logic oracles and employs logic-guided fuzzing to synthesize valid, safety-critical traces. Building on this framework, we construct LogiSafetyBench, a benchmark comprising 240 human-verified tasks that require LLMs to generate Python programs that satisfy both functional objectives and latent compliance rules. Evaluations of 13 state-of-the-art (SOTA) LLMs reveal that larger models, despite achieving better functional correctness, frequently prioritize task completion over safety, which results in non-compliant behavior.