# From Risk Classification to Action Plan Remediation: A Guardrail Feedback Driven Framework for LLM Agents

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.05805 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.05805/

## Key facts

- Cited by 6 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 17 of its 27 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2026.

## Placed in

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 17 of 17)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.06261/) (2025)
- [HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04249/) (2024)
- [Agent Security Bench (ASB): Formalizing and Benchmarking Attacks and Defenses in LLM-based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.02644/) (2024)
- [AgentTuning: Enabling Generalized Agent Abilities for LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12823/) (2023)
- [Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.14470/) (2024)
- [LlamaFirewall: An open source guardrail system for building secure AI agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.03574/) (2025)
- [GuardAgent: Safeguard LLM Agents by a Guard Agent via Knowledge-Enabled Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.09187/) (2024)
- [OS-Harm: A Benchmark for Measuring Safety of Computer Use Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.14866/) (2025)
- [AGrail: A Lifelong Agent Guardrail with Effective and Adaptive Safety Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11448/) (2025)
- [ToolSafe: Enhancing Tool Invocation Safety of LLM-based agents via Proactive Step-level Guardrail and Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.10156/) (2026)
- [VeriGuard: Enhancing LLM Agent Safety via Verified Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.05156/) (2025)
- [VPI-Bench: Visual Prompt Injection Attacks for Computer-Use Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.02456/) (2025)
- [Building a Foundational Guardrail for General Agentic Systems via Synthetic Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.09781/) (2025)
- [A Survey on the Safety and Security Threats of Computer-Using Agents: JARVIS or Ultron?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.10924/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [What Can Be Enforced? A Theory of Certified Runtime Safety for Tool-Using Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.22868/) (2026)
- [Preventing Premature Commitment in Coding Agents with an Evidence-Conditioned Execution Layer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.28815/) (2026)
- [The CASE Framework: A Multi-Disciplinary Control Architecture for Governing Enterprise Agentic AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.10153/) (2026)
- [AgentGuard: Learning Execution Guardrails from Anomalous Coding-Agent Trajectories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.16287/) (2026)
- [Understanding and Exploiting Initialization Anchoring Weakness in Feedback-Based Agent Planning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.29697/) (2026)
- [Jailbreak Context Lingers: Divergent Safety Routing and Its Cross-Task Predictability in Tool Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.34686/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

LLM-based guardrails typically safeguard agents by evaluating proposed actions or inputs before execution, producing safety signals such as binary allow/deny decisions, risk categories, and/or explanatory rationales about potential policy violations. However, agent risks often arise when otherwise benign tasks are contaminated by untrusted external content, unsafe instructions, or risky tool use. Existing guardrails often flag the entire task uniformly as unsafe, thereby blocking the threat but sacrificing the benign part. Moreover, existing work largely evaluates guardrails in isolation, leaving unclear whether their interventions lead to safer downstream agent behavior. To address this, we introduce TRIAD (Tripartite Response for Iterative Agent Guardrailing), a guardrail-integrated agent framework that leverages guardrail-generated verbal feedback as a guiding signal to keep the agent aligned with benign objectives at each planning step. We finetune a language model on a self-curated training dataset to output one of three decisions: proceed, refuse, or update, together with structured natural-language feedback. Rather than merely allowing or blocking execution, update guides the agent to revise its plan, avoid harmful components, and preserve the benign task where possible. TRIAD injects this feedback into the agent's context, enabling subsequent plan revision and forming a closed loop between guardrail feedback and agent planning. Extensive experiments on ASB and AgentHarm show that TRIAD reduces the average attack success rate to 10.42%, while achieving the best safety-utility trade-off among guardrail-integrated baselines. Our code is available at: https://github.com/YUHAOSUNABC/TRIAD.