Autonomous Topology Mutation: Safe Runtime Restructuring for Multi-Agent LLM Systems with Capability, State, and Shadow Invariants
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Multi-agent LLM frameworks typically fix their team topology at boot time. When an individual agent becomes overloaded at runtime, for example by mixing too many action categories, accumulating tool errors, or queueing behind too many calls, the system has no mechanism to restructure itself. We introduce Autonomous Topology Mutation (ATM), a runtime team-mutation mechanism for multi-agent LLM frameworks. ATM combines telemetry-driven overload detection with three safety invariants that gate each structural change: capability monotonicity, state-routing completeness, and shadow-before-live validation. ATM monitors a six-signal Bottleneck Index that includes queue depth, context thrash, tool-error rate, role entropy, retry-loop rate, and cross-agent wait time. When a warmup-calibrated threshold is breached for multiple consecutive ticks, ATM factorises the overloaded agent into specialised sub-agents and hot-swaps the parent into a coordinator role while preserving its external identity. State transfer is controlled by privacy-level-aware routing: each memory atom is routed only to a permitted child set, or explicitly dropped with a logged reason. No candidate topology receives live traffic until it has passed a shadow validation window. On 720 DeepSeek-V3-driven task runs with deterministic tool stubs across four ablation conditions and three workloads, the ATM factoriser split lifts code-task success from 3.3% to 61.7%. The full rail-and-distillation system reduces detected high-privacy memory exposure under a regex classifier from 2.0 to 0.0 events per task while preserving task quality. The runtime rails carrying ATM's invariants add less than 500 microseconds of p99 latency on the agent hot path. A small live-tool probe with real Python execution is included as an external-validity check. The implementation, benchmark harness, and traces are open-sourced.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 9 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2026.
Builds on
9 of 21 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 8
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,064
- 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,317
- 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 2,950
- 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,084
- 2023DSPy: Compiling Declarative Language Model Calls into Self-Improving Pipelinescited by 803
- 2023NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Railscited by 347
- 2026DyTopo: Dynamic Topology Routing for Multi-Agent Reasoning via Semantic Matchingcited by 8
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026A Policy-Driven Runtime Layer for Agentic LLM Serving
- 2026Architectural Design, Not Only Model Intelligence, Governs Multi-Agent LLM Performance
- 2026EvoUndo: Recoverability-Constrained Self-Evolution for LLM Agent Harnesses
- 2026EvoTool: Self-Evolving Tool-Use Policy Optimization in LLM Agents via Blame-Aware Mutation and Diversity-Aware Selection
- 2026Towards Traffic Modelling of Multi-Agent Systems: The Role of Coordination Topology
- 2026The Replay Gap: Static Evaluation of Model Switching in LLM Agents Scores the Wrong World
- 2026SafeCoEvo: Co-Evolving Safety Harnesses and Guards for LLM Agents at Test-Time
- 2025ALAS: Transactional and Dynamic Multi-Agent LLM Planning