mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Recoverability as a System Primitive for Long-Horizon AI Agents

arXiv 2609.13672 ↗First posted 12 Sep 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

AI agents can be interrupted while editing files, calling tools, or carrying out multi-step tasks. Restarting repeats completed work, but continuing from unverified or outdated progress can carry earlier errors forward. A saved state is not necessarily a suitable place to resume. We introduce recoverability as a system primitive that makes reuse an explicit decision: select a supported starting point and a permitted recovery action, or withhold automatic continuation. Its behavioral contract binds that choice to supporting evidence, execution, and independent checks. A reference architecture connects persistence, validation, and control, with complementary runtime instances testing distinct responsibilities. Four deterministic and 20 paired file challenges demonstrate that accurate restoration and successful completion can conceal disallowed starting points. Progress controls attribute retained work to shared restoration. Event-time tests show that permission must also constrain the action, and that independently held policy evidence can expose violations even after an effect occurs. These findings establish why recovery decisions need their own evaluation, beyond restored bytes and final task success. Within supplied policies and a declared trust model, the contribution is a common, testable interface for retaining justified progress and making the conditions for its reuse explicit and enforceable.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Sep 2026.

Builds on

15 of 21 references.

References · 15

  1. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
  2. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,072
  3. 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,064
  4. 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behaviorcited by 3,500
  5. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
  6. 2023Voyager: An Open-Ended Embodied Agent with Large Language Modelscited by 2,081
  7. 2023WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agentscited by 1,908
  8. 2023MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systemscited by 1,295
  9. 2024OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environmentscited by 1,134
  10. 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,084
  11. 2024ToolSandbox: A Stateful, Conversational, Interactive Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Tool Use Capabilitiescited by 272
  12. 2025Evaluation and Benchmarking of LLM Agents: A Surveycited by 145
3 more
  1. 2025Where LLM Agents Fail and How They can Learn From Failurescited by 118
  2. 2026Crab: A Semantics-Aware Checkpoint/Restore Runtime for Agent Sandboxescited by 11
  3. 2025Hell or High Water: Evaluating Agentic Recovery from External Failurescited by 6

Built on by

Not cited yet.