TAI3: Testing Agent Integrity in Interpreting User Intent
Shiwei Feng, Xiangzhe Xu, Xuan Chen, Kaiyuan Zhang, Syed Yusuf Ahmed, Zian Su, Mingwei Zheng, Xiangyu Zhang
Abstract
LLM agents are increasingly deployed to automate real-world tasks by invoking APIs through natural language instructions. While powerful, they often suffer from misinterpretation of user intent, leading to the agent's actions that diverge from the user's intended goal, especially as external toolkits evolve. Traditional software testing assumes structured inputs and thus falls short in handling the ambiguity of natural language. We introduce TAI3, an API-centric stress testing framework that systematically uncovers intent integrity violations in LLM agents. Unlike prior work focused on fixed benchmarks or adversarial inputs, TAI3 generates realistic tasks based on toolkits' documentation and applies targeted mutations to expose subtle agent errors while preserving user intent. To guide testing, we propose semantic partitioning, which organizes natural language tasks into meaningful categories based on toolkit API parameters and their equivalence classes. Within each partition, seed tasks are mutated and ranked by a lightweight predictor that estimates the likelihood of triggering agent errors. To enhance efficiency, TAI3 maintains a datatype-aware strategy memory that retrieves and adapts effective mutation patterns from past cases. Experiments on 80 toolkit APIs demonstrate that TAI3 effectively uncovers intent integrity violations, significantly outperforming baselines in both error-exposing rate and query efficiency. Moreover, TAI3 generalizes well to stronger target models using smaller LLMs for test generation, and adapts to evolving APIs across domains.
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.
Builds on39
- TextBugger: Generating Adversarial Text Against Real-world ApplicationsJinfeng Li, Shouling Ji, Tianyu Du, Bo Li et al.NDSS 2019 · 876 citations
- Tree of Attacks: Jailbreaking Black-Box LLMs AutomaticallyAnay Mehrotra, Manolis Zampetakis, Paul Kassianik, Blaine Nelson et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 835 citations
- AutoDAN: Generating Stealthy Jailbreak Prompts on Aligned Large Language ModelsXiaogeng Liu, Nan Xu, Muhao Chen, Chaowei XiaoICLR 2024 · 722 citations
- AgentPoison: Red-teaming LLM Agents via Poisoning Memory or Knowledge BasesZhaorun Chen, Zhen Xiang, Chaowei Xiao, Dawn Song et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 539 citations
- GPT-4 Is Too Smart To Be Safe: Stealthy Chat with LLMs via CipherYouliang Yuan, Wenxiang Jiao, Wenxuan Wang, Jen-tse Huang et al.ICLR 2024 · 441 citations
Related papers
- Make Agent Defeat Agent: Automatic Detection of Taint-Style Vulnerabilities in LLM-based AgentsFengyu Liu, Yuan Zhang, Jiaqi Luo, Jiarun Dai et al.USENIX Security 2025
- Can Agents Generalize to the Open World? Unveiling the Fragility of Static Training in Tool UseWeiming Wu, Song-Lin Lv, Rui Zhu, Zijian Cheng et al.ICML 2026 · 1 citation
- The Task Shield: Enforcing Task Alignment to Defend Against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM AgentsFeiran Jia, Tong Wu, Xin Qin, Anna Cinzia SquicciariniACL 2025
- LogicHunter: Testing LLM Agent Frameworks with an Agentic OracleMinghui Long, Yanjie Zhao, Haoyu WangISSTA 2026
- Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated SandboxYangjun Ruan, Honghua Dong, Andrew Wang, Silviu Pitis et al.ICLR 2024 · 292 citations
