mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Stable Agentic Control: Tool-Mediated LLM Architecture for Autonomous Cyber Defense

arXiv 2605.03034 ↗First posted 4 May 2026cs.AI cs.CR cs.SYcited by 3

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Agentic systems involved in high-stake decision-making under adversarial pressure need formal guarantees not offered by existing approaches. Motivated by the operational needs of security operations centers (SOCs) that must configure endpoint detection and response (EDR) policies under adversarial pressure, we present a tool-mediated architecture: LLM agents use deterministic tools (Stackelberg best-response, Bayesian observer updates, attack-graph primitives) and select from finite action catalogs enforced at the tool-output interface. A composite Lyapunov function machine-checked in Lean 4 with zero sorry certifies controllability, observability from asymmetric sensor data, and Input-to-State Stability (ISS) robustness under intelligent adversarial disturbance, with two corollaries extending the certificate to any controller or adversary from the catalogs. On 282 real enterprise attack graphs, the claims hold with margin. On paired offensive/defensive telemetry, a tool-mediated Claude Sonnet 4 controller reduces the attacker's expected payoff (game value) by 59% relative to a deterministic greedy baseline, with zero variance across 40 runs at four temperatures. A Claude Haiku 4.5 controller converges to suboptimal game values but stays catalog-bounded over an additional 40 runs, demonstrating that architectural stability is not dependent on the controller capability. The LLM agent's non-determinism furthers creative exploration of strategies, while the tool-mediated architecture ensures system stability.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 18 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 May 2026.

Builds on

18 of 39 references.

Closest ancestors · 6

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026Agent Behavioral Contracts: Formal Specification and Runtime Enforcement for Reliable Autonomous AI Agents25 Feb
  2. 2026Agents of Chaos23 Feb
  3. 2026MaMa: A Game-Theoretic Approach for Designing Safe Agentic Systems4 Feb
  4. 2025Enforcing Temporal Constraints for LLM Agents25 Dec
  5. 2025Game Theory Meets LLM and Agentic AI: Reimagining Cybersecurity for the Age of Intelligent Threats14 Jul
  6. 2025AgentSpec: Customizable Runtime Enforcement for Safe and Reliable LLM Agents24 Mar

Other references · 12

  1. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
  2. 2022Do As I Can, Not As I Say: Grounding Language in Robotic Affordancescited by 2,302
  3. 2022Inner Monologue: Embodied Reasoning through Planning with Language Modelscited by 1,057
  4. 2017Safe Model-based Reinforcement Learning with Stability Guaranteescited by 347
  5. 2018A Lyapunov-based Approach to Safe Reinforcement Learningcited by 278
  6. 2024Towards Guaranteed Safe AI: A Framework for Ensuring Robust and Reliable AI Systemscited by 94
  7. 2015Learning to Search Better Than Your Teachercited by 50
  8. 2020Finding Effective Security Strategies through Reinforcement Learning and Self-Playcited by 32
  9. 2024ActSafe: Active Exploration with Safety Constraints for Reinforcement Learningcited by 22
  10. 2026Type-Checked Compliance: Deterministic Guardrails for Agentic Financial Systems Using Lean 4 Theorem Provingcited by 2
  11. 2019Dynamic NE Seeking for Multi-Integrator Networked Agents with Disturbance Rejectioncited by 1
  12. 2026Cybersecurity AI: A Game-Theoretic AI for Guiding Attack and Defensecited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026ZERO-APT: A Closed-Loop Adversarial Framework for LLM-Driven Automated Penetration Testing under Intelligent Defense ↗
  2. 2026Agentic Security: A Systematization of Tools, Failure Modes, and Design Laws for LLM-Driven Penetration Testing
  3. 2025AegisLLM: Scaling Agentic Systems for Self-Reflective Defense in LLM Security
  4. 2026Autonomous Adversary: Red-Teaming in the age of LLM
  5. 2026BlueSTAR: Tiered Agentic Architecture for Autonomous Cyber Defense
  6. 2026Neuro-Agentic Control: A Deep Learning-based LLM-Powered Agentic AI Framework for Controlling Security Controls
  7. 2026Where Cyber Agents Struggle: Bottleneck Analysis of Multi-Stage LLM Agents
  8. 2026Ask the Expert: LLM-Guided Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Cyber Defense