mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

SiLR: Structure-Preserving Admission and Process Reward for LLM Tool Agents

arXiv 2609.04629 ↗First posted 4 Sep 2026cs.AI cs.LG cs.SYcited by 1

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

A runtime gate for an LLM tool agent is usually cast as a filter. In a ReAct loop a rejected proposal is followed by another at the same state, so the gate is a search operator over the proposal stream whose admission criterion shapes which trajectories are reachable. We study post-violation recovery admission, where progress must be admitted while the system is still in violation, and identify the scalar projection trap: an aggregate-score gate accepts a locally improving proposal and commits the trajectory to a plateau. SiLR instead shadow-executes each proposal and admits it under a product order over the branch-level violation state (overloaded-branch support and per-branch severity). We prove that no scalar surrogate is sound for this order, so the failure is representational, not a matter of threshold tuning. On mined Gym-ANM scenarios, SiLR recovers 21/21 multi-action episodes against 0/21 for terminal and 9/21 for the best scalar gate, significant across the full 24-scenario benchmark. The terminal-versus-structured dichotomy holds across three model families and in CityLearn. Because admission rests on deterministic simulation, the LLM lies outside the trust boundary: a magnitude-redistribution attack that defeats both scalar and support-only baselines is contained only by the full per-branch predicate. With two constraint families active, every tested scalar projection admits physically unsafe actions; support-only admits the largest fraction (63.2% of 42,410; product order 0). In the hardest dual-family traces, scalar gates recover only through that unsafe class. Reused as a GRPO process reward, it outperforms its count projection in every mined scenario and is the only tested reward whose ungated policy exceeds the untrained base (0.844 vs. 0.778). Scalar projection loses the violation geometry at both design points; only the full product order is structurally sufficient.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 13 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Sep 2026.

Builds on

13 of 23 references.

References · 13

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  2. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 9,379
  3. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  4. 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,789
  5. 2022Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedbackcited by 901
  6. 2025AgentSpec: Customizable Runtime Enforcement for Safe and Reliable LLM Agentscited by 223
  7. 2020Recovery RL: Safe Reinforcement Learning with Learned Recovery Zonescited by 175
  8. 2025ShieldAgent: Shielding Agents via Verifiable Safety Policy Reasoningcited by 151
  9. 2024GuardAgent: Safeguard LLM Agents by a Guard Agent via Knowledge-Enabled Reasoningcited by 124
  10. 2025VeriGuard: Enhancing LLM Agent Safety via Verified Code Generationcited by 49
  11. 2025Grid-Agent: An LLM-Powered Multi-Agent System for Power Grid Controlcited by 15
  12. 2026The Verifier Tax: Horizon Dependent Safety Success Tradeoffs in Tool Using LLM Agentscited by 11
1 more
  1. 2026Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning with Runtime Safety Shielding for Power Grid Operationcited 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. 2026When Tools Fail: Benchmarking Dynamic Replanning and Anomaly Recovery in LLM Agents
  2. 2025ReflexGrad: Within-Episode Failure Recovery in LLM Agents via Progress-Gated Dual-Process Routing
  3. 2026PeakBench: Benchmarking Resource-Aware Tool Invocation in LLM Agents
  4. 2026Complete Cyclic Subtask Graphs for Tool-Using LLM Agents: Flexibility, Cost, and Bottlenecks in Long-Horizon Workflows
  5. 2026Coupling Planning with Episodic Memory in LLM Agents for Software Issue Resolution
  6. 2026AgentRewind: Recoverable Execution for Long-Horizon LLM Agents
  7. 2026PlanBench-XL: Evaluating Long-Horizon Planning of LLM Tool-Use Agents in Large-Scale Tool Ecosystems
  8. 2026Auditing Action Settlement in LLM Agent Environments: Order, Progress, and Replay