ActionGuard: Tool Call Authorization under Poisoned Skills
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance
Abstract (arXiv)
LLM-based agents extend their capabilities through third-party skills that provide task-specific instructions, scripts, and tool-use procedures. However, malicious instructions inserted into an otherwise benign skill can cause a benign user request to trigger dangerous Tool Calls, including data exfiltration, file deletion, or unauthorized code execution. This paper presents ActionGuard, which inspects skill-influenced Tool Calls immediately before execution. ActionGuard separates the target agent's action-generation context from the safeguard's authorization context. The target agent may use the original skill for planning, but the Reviewer does not receive the potentially poisoned raw skill text. Instead, it determines whether each action is justified by the trusted user request using a balanced skill profile, current and recent Tool Calls, and local script contents. ActionGuard intercepts each Tool Call at OpenClaw's before-tool-call stage and enforces the Reviewer's ALLOW or DENY decision under a fail-closed policy. We evaluate ActionGuard on 139 contextual and 180 obvious injections in a SKILL-INJECT-based setting against Dynamic Guardian and SkillGuard, using three open-source and two commercial Reviewer models. Each condition is repeated three times and evaluated using Attack Success Rate (ASR) and Task Success Rate (TSR). Overall, ActionGuard reduced ASR by 35.54 to 46.11 percent relative to existing safeguards and by 70.44 percent relative to No Safeguard, while maintaining high benign-task completion. These results show that execution-boundary authorization grounded in trusted user intent and runtime evidence can restrict unauthorized Tool Calls induced by skill injection.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 26 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2026.
Builds on
26 of 48 references.
Closest ancestors · 17
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Defenses & Enablers For Skill Injection Attacks on Terminal Based Agents1 Jun
- 2026AttriGuard: Defeating Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents via Causal Attribution of Tool Invocations11 Mar
- 2026"Do Not Mention This to the User": Detecting and Understanding Malicious Agent Skills in the Wild6 Feb
- 2026Agent Skills in the Wild: An Empirical Study of Security Vulnerabilities at Scale15 Jan
- 2026ToolSafe: Enhancing Tool Invocation Safety of LLM-based agents via Proactive Step-level Guardrail and Feedback15 Jan
- 2026VIGIL: Defending LLM Agents Against Tool Stream Injection via Verify-Before-Commit9 Jan
- 2025IPIGuard: A Novel Tool Dependency Graph-Based Defense Against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents21 Aug
- 2025OS-Harm: A Benchmark for Measuring Safety of Computer Use Agents17 Jun
- 2025DRIFT: Dynamic Rule-Based Defense with Injection Isolation for Securing LLM Agents13 Jun
- 2025ShieldAgent: Shielding Agents via Verifiable Safety Policy Reasoning26 Mar
- 2025AgentSpec: Customizable Runtime Enforcement for Safe and Reliable LLM Agents24 Mar
- 2025Adaptive Attacks Break Defenses Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on LLM Agents27 Feb
5 more
- 2024The Task Shield: Enforcing Task Alignment to Defend Against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents21 Dec
- 2024AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents11 Oct
- 2024GuardAgent: Safeguard LLM Agents by a Guard Agent via Knowledge-Enabled Reasoning13 Jun
- 2024R-Judge: Benchmarking Safety Risk Awareness for LLM Agents18 Jan
- 2023Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandbox25 Sep
Other references · 9
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,182
- 2023ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIscited by 1,947
- 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,443
- 2023Mind2Web: Towards a Generalist Agent for the Webcited by 1,242
- 2024StruQ: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Structured Queriescited by 375
- 2023Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Modelscited by 264
- 2024SecAlign: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Preference Optimizationcited by 210
- 2026ReCreate: Reasoning and Creating Domain Agents Driven by Experiencecited by 24
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026ActGuard: Pre-execution Action Auditing against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents
- 2026AIRGuard: Guarding Agent Actions with Runtime Authority Control
- 2026Skill-Inject: Measuring Agent Vulnerability to Skill File Attacks
- 2026SkillGuard: A Permission-Centric Framework for Agent Skill Security
- 2026SkillShield: Prompt-Space Security Skills for LLM Coding Agents
- 2026ROPE: Routed Origin Policy Enforcement against Indirect Prompt Injection
- 2026Think Twice Before You Act: Protecting LLM Agents Against Tool Description Poisoning via Isolated Planning
- 2026When Tool Outputs Become Commands: Separating Action Induction from Runtime Authorization in Tool-Augmented LLM Agents