When LLM Agents See a Conflict but Still Proceed: Cross-Domain Dependencies in Network Slicing
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agentic AI for wireless networks also fits: Agent threats, guardrails and governance
Abstract (arXiv)
Future AI-native networks are being designed to apply autonomous agents built on large language models (LLMs) in network management through intents. When intents from different domains meet on the same resource, an agent must recognize the cross-domain dependency before taking an irreversible action. We investigate this problem through a smart-grid use case, in which a power utility holds an active intent on a backup slice for protection traffic. This slice appears idle by design, which is precisely the profile targeted by a cost-reduction intent. We built a tool-based environment in which the dependency must be either queried by the agent or read from an inventory annotation, together with a negative control, and evaluated ten models from four different providers in 600 runs. Most models acted against the dependency they had observed: seven of the ten models removed the protection slice at least once after receiving the cross-domain dependency, and in the high-harm tier the slice was removed in 76% of the exposed runs, while four models practically never did. Only one of ten models never removed the slice. We identify two failure modes, not querying the dependency and querying it but proceeding anyway, and show that agents often reported no conflict after observing it. These results indicate that, in AI-native networks, visibility of cross-domain dependencies is not a sufficient safeguard, and that dependency verification should be enforced by the management architecture before irreversible actions rather than delegated to the LLM's judgment.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agentic AI for wireless networks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 3 of its 10 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Oct 2026.
Builds on
3 of 10 references.
References · 3
- 2024Towards Intent-Based Network Management: Large Language Models for Intent Extraction in 5G Core Networkscited by 17
- 20266G-Bench: An Open Benchmark for Semantic Communication and Network-Level Reasoning with Foundation Models in AI-Native 6G Networkscited by 7
- 2021Intent-based Network Management and Orchestration for Smart Distribution Gridscited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Runtime Burden Allocation for Structured LLM Routing in Agentic Expert Systems: A Full-Factorial Cross-Backend Methodology
- 2026ProtoArena: Can AI Agents Discover and Exploit Real-World Cross-Component Protocol Vulnerabilities?
- 2025Cross-LLM Generalization of Behavioral Backdoor Detection in AI Agent Supply Chains
- 2026Beyond Predefined Sinks: Security-Aware Dependency Analysis for LLM Agents
- 2026Let AI Agents Translate Networks, Not Reason About Them
- 2026NetInspector: Measuring and Improving LLM Capabilities for Reliable Intent-Based Networking Policy Generation
- 2025Tool Preferences in Agentic LLMs are Unreliable
- 2025LLM-Empowered Agentic AI for QoE-Aware Network Slicing Management in Industrial IoT ↗