MCAIR: Monitoring and Correcting Agent Unfaithfulness via Internal Representations
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance also fits: Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in completing complex tasks through multi-step reasoning and tool interactions. However, recent studies have revealed that LLM-based agents can exhibit unfaithful behaviors, where their final reports fail to faithfully reflect their actual execution trajectories. Specifically, when agents fail to accomplish tasks through the intended sources or procedures, they may resort to alternative sources or strategies while failing to disclose such deviations, leading users to incorrectly believe that the tasks have been completed according to the original requirements. We refer to this specific form of agent unfaithfulness as Agent Completion Unfaithfulness. Detecting and mitigating agent completion unfaithfulness is critical yet remains largely unexplored. In this work, we propose MCAIR, a runtime monitoring and correction framework that leverages internal representations of LLM-based agents. MCAIR uses multi-step internal representations as inputs to train a risk-aware probe, enabling online detection of potential completion unfaithfulness during execution. Furthermore, MCAIR introduces a risk-guided correction loop that prompts agents to review their execution history and mitigate potential inconsistencies between their execution trajectories and final reports. Additionally, we construct ACUD, a dataset for Agent Completion Unfaithfulness detection that provides step-level execution traces, step-level internal representations, and consistency annotations for training and evaluating runtime detection probes. Experiments demonstrate that MCAIR outperforms LLM-as-a-judge baselines, generalizes across prompts and tasks, and effectively reduces agent completion unfaithfulness.
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 29 of its 57 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Oct 2026.
Builds on
29 of 57 references.
Closest ancestors · 4
Same direction, newest first
- 2026ATBench: A Diverse and Realistic Agent Trajectory Benchmark for Safety Evaluation and Diagnosis2 Apr
- 2025Shadows in the Code: Exploring the Risks and Defenses of LLM-based Multi-Agent Software Development Systems23 Nov
- 2025SecureVibeBench: Benchmarking Secure Vibe Coding of AI Agents via Reconstructing Vulnerability-Introducing Scenarios26 Sep
- 2024Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents19 Dec
Other references · 25
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 4,033
- 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,442
- 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
- 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,242
- 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,824
- 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,423
- 2023Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparencycited by 1,336
13 more
- 2021Probing Classifiers: Promises, Shortcomings, and Advancescited by 876
- 2022Discovering Latent Knowledge in Language Models Without Supervisioncited by 767
- 2023The Geometry of Truth: Emergent Linear Structure in Large Language Model Representations of True/False Datasetscited by 712
- 2024Executable Code Actions Elicit Better LLM Agentscited by 564
- 2024From Generation to Judgment: Opportunities and Challenges of LLM-as-a-judgecited by 494
- 2025ToolRL: Reward is All Tool Learning Needscited by 362
- 2024INSIDE: LLMs' Internal States Retain the Power of Hallucination Detectioncited by 323
- 2024LLMs Know More Than They Show: On the Intrinsic Representation of LLM Hallucinationscited by 244
- 2025Large Language Model Agent: A Survey on Methodology, Applications and Challengescited by 205
- 2024HaloScope: Harnessing Unlabeled LLM Generations for Hallucination Detectioncited by 99
- 2024Planning, Creation, Usage: Benchmarking LLMs for Comprehensive Tool Utilization in Real-World Complex Scenarioscited by 86
- 2025Among Us: A Sandbox for Measuring and Detecting Agentic Deceptioncited by 26
- 2025The Reasoning Trap: How Enhancing LLM Reasoning Amplifies Tool Hallucinationcited by 14
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Beyond Task Completion: Revealing Corrupt Success in LLM Agents through Procedure-Aware Evaluation
- 2026AgentAbstain: Do LLM Agents Know When Not to Act?
- 2026TraceSIR: A Multi-Agent Framework for Structured Analysis and Reporting of Agentic Execution Traces
- 2026BenchShield: Formal Model-Backed Instrumentation for Reward Integrity in LLM-Agent Evaluation Infrastructure
- 2026TRACE: Diagnosing Verifier Brittleness in Agentic Evaluation
- 2026Evidence-Calibrated Runtime Reconstruction for Agent Skills Across Heterogeneous Coding Agents
- 2025AgenTracer: Who Is Inducing Failure in the LLM Agentic Systems?
- 2026Maintaining Benchmarks Against Increasingly Capable Agents: Detection and Remediation of Unearned Passes