SARC: A Governance-by-Architecture Framework for Agentic AI Systems
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance
Abstract (arXiv)
Agentic AI systems increasingly act through tools, sub-agents, and external services, but governance controls are still commonly attached to prompts, dashboards, or post-hoc documentation. This creates a structural mismatch in regulated settings: obligations that must constrain execution are often evaluated only after execution has occurred. We introduce SARC, a runtime governance architecture for tool-using agents that treats constraints as first-class specification objects alongside state, action space, and reward. A SARC specification declares each constraint's source, class, predicate, verification point, response protocol, and operating point, and compiles these into four enforcement sites in the agent loop: a Pre-Action Gate, an Action-Time Monitor, a Post-Action Auditor, and an Escalation Router. We formalize the minimal invariants required for specification-trace correspondence, show why finite reward penalties do not generally substitute for hard runtime constraints, and extend the architecture to multi-agent workflows through constraint propagation, authority intersection, and attribution-preserving trace trees. We implement a prototype audit checker and report a reproducible synthetic evaluation over 50 seeds comparing SARC against post-hoc audit, output filtering, workflow rules, and policy-as-code-only baselines on a procurement task. SARC executes zero hard-constraint violations under exact predicates; its declared PAA throttling response reduces soft-window overages by 89.5% relative to policy-as-code-only. Predicate-noise and enforcement-failure sweeps are consistent with the claim that residual hard violations under SARC scale with enforcement-stack error rather than environmental violation opportunity. SARC provides the architectural substrate through which obligations can be made executable, inspectable, and auditable at runtime.
Key facts. Cited by 5 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 22 of its 70 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 May 2026.
Builds on
22 of 70 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 21
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
- 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,182
- 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behaviorcited by 3,568
- 2023Voyager: An Open-Ended Embodied Agent with Large Language Modelscited by 2,191
- 2023AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversationcited by 1,988
- 2023MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Frameworkcited by 1,808
- 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,642
- 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,443
- 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,386
- 2023Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIscited by 1,332
- 2023AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agentscited by 1,267
9 more
- 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,080
- 2017Constrained Policy Optimizationcited by 983
- 2020Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditingcited by 384
- 2020Responsive Safety in Reinforcement Learning by PID Lagrangian Methodscited by 316
- 2021Unsolved Problems in ML Safetycited by 292
- 2022Defining and Characterizing Reward Hackingcited by 203
- 2018Categorizing Variants of Goodhart's Lawcited by 149
- 2021Demystifying the Draft EU Artificial Intelligence Actcited by 84
- 2022Outsider Oversight: Designing a Third Party Audit Ecosystem for AI Governancecited by 67
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026Green SARC: Predictive Cost and Carbon Governance for Agentic AI Systemscited by 3
- 2026SARC-DQ: Runtime Data-Quality Gating for Agentic AI: Silent Evidence Defects, the Incompetence Shield, and Downstream-Only Remediationcited by 3
- 2026One Gate Is Not Enough: Composing Stateful Pre-Action Controls for Agentic AIcited by 2
- 2026Quipu: A Governed Bitemporal Knowledge Graph Storecited by 0
- 2026When Agents Act Unwatched: The Reduced-Supervision Paradox in Agentic AIcited by 0
- 2026When Agents Act Unwatched: The Reduced-Supervision Paradox in Agentic AI28 Aug 2026
- 2026One Gate Is Not Enough: Composing Stateful Pre-Action Controls for Agentic AI18 Aug 2026
- 2026Quipu: A Governed Bitemporal Knowledge Graph Store17 Aug 2026
- 2026SARC-DQ: Runtime Data-Quality Gating for Agentic AI: Silent Evidence Defects, the Incompetence Shield, and Downstream-Only Remediation28 Jul 2026
- 2026Green SARC: Predictive Cost and Carbon Governance for Agentic AI Systems14 Jun 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Behavioral Governance for Autonomous AI Agents: The AgentBound Framework
- 2026Beyond Task Success: An Evidence-Synthesis Framework for Evaluating, Governing, and Orchestrating Agentic AI
- 2026Runtime Governance for Agentic AI: Action-Boundary Control with Trusted Provenance and Fail-Closed Execution
- 2025MI9: An Integrated Runtime Governance Framework for Agentic AI
- 2026Autonomy and Agency in Agentic AI: Architectural Tactics for Regulated Contexts
- 2026CAVA: Canonical Action Verification and Attestation for Runtime Governance of Agentic AI Systems
- 2026VIGIL: Runtime Enforcement of Behavioral Specifications in AI Agent Skills
- 2026Agentic AI Containment Architecture for Security Hardening