mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Real-Time Trust Verification for Safe Agentic Actions using TrustBench

arXiv 2603.09157 ↗First posted 10 Mar 2026cs.AIcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

As large language models evolve from conversational assistants to autonomous agents, ensuring trustworthiness requires a fundamental shift from post-hoc evaluation to real-time action verification. Current frameworks like AgentBench evaluate task completion, while TrustLLM and HELM assess output quality after generation. However, none of these prevent harmful actions during agent execution. We present TrustBench, a dual-mode framework that (1) benchmarks trust across multiple dimensions using both traditional metrics and LLM-as-a-Judge evaluations, and (2) provides a toolkit agents invoke before taking actions to verify safety and reliability. Unlike existing approaches, TrustBench intervenes at the critical decision point: after an agent formulates an action but before execution. Domain-specific plugins encode specialized safety requirements for healthcare, finance, and technical domains. Across multiple agentic tasks, TrustBench reduced harmful actions by 87%. Domain-specific plugins outperformed generic verification, achieving 35% greater harm reduction. With sub-200ms latency, TrustBench enables practical real-time trust verification for autonomous agents.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 10 of its 15 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Mar 2026.

Builds on

10 of 15 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024SafeAgentBench: A Benchmark for Safe Task Planning of Embodied LLM Agents17 Dec

Other references · 9

  1. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
  2. 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
  3. 2020What Disease does this Patient Have? A Large-scale Open Domain Question Answering Dataset from Medical Examscited by 1,324
  4. 2021FinQA: A Dataset of Numerical Reasoning over Financial Datacited by 552
  5. 2022Large Language Models are Better Reasoners with Self-Verificationcited by 304
  6. 2024LLMs instead of Human Judges? A Large Scale Empirical Study across 20 NLP Evaluation Taskscited by 236
  7. 2024Red-Teaming for Generative AI: Silver Bullet or Security Theater?cited by 81
  8. 2025MedHELM: Holistic Evaluation of Large Language Models for Medical Taskscited by 60
  9. 2025VerifyBench: A Systematic Benchmark for Evaluating Reasoning Verifiers Across Domainscited by 22

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Towards trustworthy agentic AI: a comprehensive survey of safety, robustness, privacy, and system security
  2. 2026Trust No Tool: Evaluating and Defending LLM Agents under Untrusted Tool Feedback
  3. 2024ST-WebAgentBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Safety and Trustworthiness in Web Agents
  4. 2026Trustworthy Agentic AI: A Comprehensive Cybersecurity and Systems Survey on Threat Landscapes, Defense Architectures, and Open Challenges
  5. 2026Claw-Eval: Towards Trustworthy Evaluation of Autonomous Agents
  6. 2026AgentTrust: Runtime Safety Evaluation and Interception for AI Agent Tool Use
  7. 2026ActBench: Self-Evolving Benchmark of Behavioral Safety in Cowork Agents
  8. 2026REDAgentBench: Executable Red Teaming and Faithful Measurement of LLM Agent Systems