mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Policy-Invisible Violations in LLM-Based Agents

arXiv 2604.12177 ↗First posted 14 Apr 2026cs.AI cs.CL cs.CRcited by 1

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

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM-based agents can execute actions that are syntactically valid, user-sanctioned, and semantically appropriate, yet still violate organizational policy because the facts needed for correct policy judgment are hidden at decision time. We call this failure mode policy-invisible violations: cases in which compliance depends on entity attributes, contextual state, or session history absent from the agent's visible context. We present PhantomPolicy, a benchmark spanning eight violation categories with balanced violation and safe-control cases, in which all tool responses contain clean business data without policy metadata. We manually review all 600 model traces produced by five frontier models and evaluate them using human-reviewed trace labels. Manual review changes 32 labels (5.3%) relative to the original case-level annotations, confirming the need for trace-level human review. To demonstrate what world-state-grounded enforcement can achieve under favorable conditions, we introduce Sentinel, an enforcement framework based on counterfactual graph simulation. Sentinel treats every agent action as a proposed mutation to an organizational knowledge graph, performs speculative execution to materialize the post-action world state, and verifies graph-structural invariants to decide Allow/Block/Clarify. Against human-reviewed trace labels, Sentinel substantially outperforms a content-only DLP baseline (68.8% vs. 93.0% accuracy) while maintaining high precision, though it still leaves room for improvement on certain violation categories. These results demonstrate what becomes achievable once policy-relevant world state is made available to the enforcement layer.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper 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 18 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Apr 2026.

Builds on

18 of 25 references.

Closest ancestors · 6

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Agent Tools Orchestration Leaks More: Dataset, Benchmark, and Mitigation18 Dec
  2. 2025AgentDAM: Privacy Leakage Evaluation for Autonomous Web Agents12 Mar
  3. 2024AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents11 Oct
  4. 2024AgentDojo: A Dynamic Environment to Evaluate Prompt Injection Attacks and Defenses for LLM Agents19 Jun
  5. 2024R-Judge: Benchmarking Safety Risk Awareness for LLM Agents18 Jan
  6. 2023Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandbox25 Sep

Other references · 12

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  3. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
  4. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,182
  5. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 3,050
  6. 2015A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inferencecited by 1,847
  7. 2023The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Surveycited by 1,439
  8. 2023Mastering Diverse Domains through World Modelscited by 1,253
  9. 2023Formalizing and Benchmarking Prompt Injection Attacks and Defensescited by 364
  10. 2024PrivacyLens: Evaluating Privacy Norm Awareness of Language Models in Actioncited by 171
  11. 2025Keep Security! Benchmarking Security Policy Preservation in Large Language Model Contexts Against Indirect Attacks in Question Answeringcited by 5
  12. 2026Doc-PP: Document Policy Preservation Benchmark for Large Vision-Language Modelscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025EU-Agent-Bench: Measuring Illegal Behavior of LLM Agents Under EU Law
  2. 2026COMPASS: A Framework for Evaluating Organization-Specific Policy Alignment in LLMs
  3. 2026PolicyBank: Evolving Policy Understanding for LLM Agents
  4. 2026ActGov: Governing LLM Agent Actions via Policy-Constrained Validation
  5. 2026Beyond Single-Agent Alignment: Preventing Context-Fragmented Violations in Multi-Agent Systems
  6. 2026Near-Miss: Latent Policy Failure Detection in Agentic Workflows
  7. 2026Organizational Control Layer: Governance Infrastructure at the Execution Boundary of LLM Agent Systems
  8. 2025Towards Enforcing Company Policy Adherence in Agentic Workflows