Just Do It!? Computer-Use Agents Exhibit Blind Goal-Directedness
Erfan Shayegani, Keegan Hines, Yue Dong, Nael Abu-Ghazaleh, Roman Lutz, Spencer Whitehead, Vidhisha Balachandran, Besmira Nushi, Vibhav Vineet
Abstract
Computer-Use Agents (CUAs) are an increasingly deployed class of agents that take actions on GUIs to accomplish user goals. In this paper, we show that CUAs consistently exhibit Blind Goal-Directedness (BGD): a bias to pursue goals regardless of feasibility, safety, reliability, or context. We characterize three prevalent patterns of BGD: (i) lack of contextual reasoning, (ii) assumptions and decisions under ambiguity, and (iii) contradictory or infeasible goals. We develop BLIND-ACT, a benchmark of 90 tasks capturing these three patterns. Built on OSWorld (Xie et al., 2024) , BLIND-ACT provides realistic environments and employs LLM-based judges to evaluate agent behavior, achieving 93.75% agreement with human annotations. We use BLIND-ACT to evaluate nine frontier models, including Claude Sonnet and Opus 4, Computer-Use-Preview, and GPT-5, observing high average BGD rates (80.8%) across them. We show that BGD exposes subtle risks that arise even when inputs are not directly harmful. While promptingbased interventions lower BGD levels, substantial risk persists, highlighting the need for stronger training-or inference-time interventions. Qualitative analysis reveals observed failure modes: execution-first bias (focusing on how to act over whether to act), thought-action disconnect (execution diverging from reasoning), and request-primacy (justifying actions due to user request). Identifying BGD and introducing BLIND-ACT establishes a foundation for future research on studying and mitigating this fundamental risk and ensuring safe CUA deployment. Warning: This paper contains unsafe content that may be disturbing.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on7
- Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated SandboxYangjun Ruan, Honghua Dong, Andrew Wang, Silviu Pitis et al.ICLR 2024 · 292 citations
- Jailbreak in pieces: Compositional Adversarial Attacks on Multi-Modal Language ModelsErfan Shayegani, Yue Dong, Nael B. Abu-GhazalehICLR 2024 · 271 citations
- OpenCUA: Open Foundations for Computer-Use AgentsXinyuan Wang, Bowen Wang, Dunjie Lu, Junlin Yang et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 151 citations
- VPI-Bench: Visual Prompt Injection Attacks for Computer-Use AgentsTri Cao, Bennett Lim, Yue Liu, Yuan Sui et al.ICLR 2026 · 45 citations
- AndroidWorld: A Dynamic Benchmarking Environment for Autonomous AgentsChristopher Rawles, Sarah Clinckemaillie, Yifan Chang, Jonathan Waltz et al.ICLR 2025
Related papers
- When Actions Go Off-Task: Detecting and Correcting Misaligned Actions in Computer-Use AgentsYuting Ning, Jaylen Jones, Zhehao Zhang, Chentao Ye et al.ICML 2026 · 7 citations
- SafeArena: Evaluating the Safety of Autonomous Web AgentsAda Defne Tur, Nicholas Meade, Xing Han Lù, Alejandra Zambrano et al.ICML 2025
- RedTeamCUA: Realistic Adversarial Testing of Computer-Use Agents in Hybrid Web-OS EnvironmentsZeyi Liao, Jaylen Jones, Linxi Jiang, Yuting Ning et al.ICLR 2026 · 46 citations
- OSWorld-MCP: Benchmarking MCP Tool Invocation In Computer-Use AgentsHongrui Jia, Jitong Liao, Xi Zhang, Haiyang Xu et al.ICLR 2026 · 24 citations
- ScaleCUA: Scaling Open-Source Computer Use Agents with Cross-Platform DataZhaoyang Liu, Jingjing Xie, Zichen Ding, Zehao Li et al.ICLR 2026 · 54 citations
