# Agentic Self-Awareness: Aligning Knowing, Acting, and Holding

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.19226 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.19226/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 35 of its 43 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 35)

- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.11432/) (2023)
- [Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Know](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.05221/) (2022)
- [The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.07864/) (2023)
- [Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13548/) (2023)
- [Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.13063/) (2023)
- [Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.08500/) (2017)
- [DSPy: Compiling Declarative Language Model Calls into Self-Improving Pipelines](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03714/) (2023)
- [Teaching Models to Express Their Uncertainty in Words](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.14334/) (2022)
- [τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.07982/) (2025)
- [Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line Interfaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.11868/) (2026)
- [Automated Design of Agentic Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08435/) (2024)
- [Robots That Ask For Help: Uncertainty Alignment for Large Language Model Planners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.01928/) (2023)
- [Why Language Models Hallucinate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.04664/) (2025)
- [AbstentionBench: Reasoning LLMs Fail on Unanswerable Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.09038/) (2025)
- [Are You Sure? Challenging LLMs Leads to Performance Drops in The FlipFlop Experiment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08596/) (2023)
- [Overconfidence is Key: Verbalized Uncertainty Evaluation in Large Language and Vision-Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.02917/) (2024)
- [HarnessX: A Composable, Adaptive, and Evolvable Agent Harness Foundry](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.14249/) (2026)
- [UProp: Investigating the Uncertainty Propagation of LLMs in Multi-Step Agentic Decision-Making](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.17419/) (2025)
- [Towards Uncertainty-Aware Language Agent](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.14016/) (2024)
- [Position: Uncertainty Quantification Needs Reassessment for Large-language Model Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22655/) (2025)
- [HiL-Bench (Human-in-Loop Benchmark): Do Agents Know When to Ask for Help?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.09408/) (2026)
- [Uncertainty Quantification in LLM Agents: Foundations, Emerging Challenges, and Opportunities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.05073/) (2026)
- [Agentic Uncertainty Quantification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.15703/) (2026)
- [AgentAbstain: Do LLM Agents Know When Not to Act?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.10059/) (2026)
- [The Confidence Dichotomy: Analyzing and Mitigating Miscalibration in Tool-Use Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.07264/) (2026)
- [Agentic Confidence Calibration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.15778/) (2026)
- [Agentic Abstention: Do Agents Know When to Stop Instead of Act?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.28733/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Frontier AI agents increasingly act in environments where seemingly solvable tasks may lack prerequisites, contain conflicting requirements, or reveal blockers only during execution. We formulate agentic self-awareness (ASA) as the alignment of task-grounded feasibility judgments (know), warranted behavior (act), and responses to reconsideration (hold), distinguishing what a task permits from what an agent can solve. We build paired feasible and blocked tasks in Terminal-Bench 2.1 and retail τ2-bench and introduce an authorship-aware M0-M3 rubric that separates recognizing a blocker from taking the certified deferral action for the correct reason. Separate probes assess stated feasibility beliefs and responses to a single challenge. In a Terminal-Bench protocol baseline, blocker recognition reaches 84.4%, but strict self-awareness (SA) reaches only 40.6%. Harness search without model-weight updates increases strict SA from 45.3% to 93.8% on reused Terminal-Bench search tasks; selection for abstention alone, however, can reduce success on feasible tasks. Independently initialized joint-objective searches improve both blocked-task SA and feasible-task solve on their own search sets. Retail held-out gains remain limited, and Terminal-Bench blocked-task transfer is not measured. This evaluation pipeline makes the recognition-action gap measurable and sets a two-sided target for improving agent decisions under changing task evidence.