mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

One Monitor Does Not Fit All: Formalism-Agnostic Runtime Verification for Agentic AI

arXiv 2610.19818 ↗First posted 14 Oct 2026cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance also fits: Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

Agentic AI systems combine model decisions, mutable state, tool calls, and delegation to external agents. Monitoring them requires observations from different execution boundaries, while prevention requires control before an operation produces its effect. We present AgenticRV, a runtime-verification architecture that separates these boundaries from the monitoring formalism. Adapters emit canonical events; each monitor receives its own projection and abstraction; and a decision policy uses normalised verdicts to select a reaction supported by the responsible adapter. We formalise when observations suffice, monitor replacement preserves decisions, and blocking prevents unsafe effects. We also distinguish rejected attempts from completed effects, avoiding the assumption that a blocked request must leave every monitor in a permanent violation state. The Python implementation supports LangGraph, MCP, and A2A. A controlled LangGraph experiment combines an external Reelay temporal monitor with a programmatic report monitor; ablations show why both are needed for the selected requirements. Differential checks and cross-adapter tests provide further integration evidence. An LLM-driven incident-response example illustrates the same enforcement path, while existing microbenchmarks isolate framework costs. The results support reuse of monitoring methods at explicit control boundaries, subject to the stated observation and deployment assumptions.

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 11 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Oct 2026.

Builds on

11 of 16 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025ProbGuard: Proactive Runtime Monitoring for LLM Agent Safety via Probabilistic Prediction1 Aug
  2. 2025AgentSpec: Customizable Runtime Enforcement for Safe and Reliable LLM Agents24 Mar
  3. 2024AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents11 Oct

Other references · 8

  1. 2023NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Railscited by 365
  2. 2023NL2TL: Transforming Natural Languages to Temporal Logics using Large Language Modelscited by 59
  3. 2025RvLLM: LLM Runtime Verification with Domain Knowledgecited by 17
  4. 2022Correct-by-Construction Runtime Enforcement in AI -- A Surveycited by 12
  5. 2019Online Monitoring of Metric Temporal Logic using Sequential Networkscited by 2
  6. 2025Watchdogs and Oracles: Runtime Verification Meets Large Language Models for Autonomous Systemscited by 2
  7. 2024ROSMonitoring 2.0: Extending ROS Runtime Verification to Services and Ordered Topicscited by 1
  8. 2024RV4Chatbot: Are Chatbots Allowed to Dream of Electric Sheep?cited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Architectural Obsolescence of Unhardened Agentic-AI Runtimes
  2. 2026TriCEGAR: A Trace-Driven Abstraction Mechanism for Agentic AI
  3. 2026VIGIL: Runtime Enforcement of Behavioral Specifications in AI Agent Skills
  4. 2025AgentGuard: Runtime Verification of AI Agents
  5. 2026AgentSpy: Making AI Agent Behavior Observable
  6. 2026SARC: A Governance-by-Architecture Framework for Agentic AI Systems
  7. 2026When Agentic Executions Fail: Detecting and Localizing Runtime Faults from Telemetry
  8. 2026Agentic Model Checking