Assistive Prompt Mediation: Evaluating Language Models Under Accessibility Constraints

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as assistive interfaces for users who cannot reliably produce clean text due to accessibility constraints, yet existing evaluations assume iterative input repair and focus on task accuracy or generic noise robustness. We introduce Assistive Prompt Mediation (APM), a theory-grounded evaluation paradigm that reframes assistance as a constrained mediation problem: recovering latent user intent from accessibility-impaired input without clarification, while minimizing cognitive burden and hallucination risk. APM decomposes assistive quality along these axes and is instantiated across 8 languages, 4 accessibility-driven noise classes, and 10 frontier LLMs, with impairment severity yielding accessibility sensitivity curves. Results show that apparent robustness often masks trade-offs—high intent preservation frequently coincides with increased burden or hallucinated mediation, hallucination rates vary by more than $2\times$ across noise types, and assistive decisions exhibit bounded entropy ($<0.81$ normalized), indicating systematic rather than unstable behavior. These findings demonstrate that standard robustness metrics substantially overestimate assistive reliability and motivate evaluating LLMs as constrained mediators under accessibility-driven input degradation.