CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.AI2026-07-12

The Compliance Trap: Diagnosing How AI Agents Consume Conflicting Memory

Yixiong Chen, Xinyi Bai, Alan Yuille

Memory is becoming a core component of long-horizon AI agents, allowing agents to reuse past experience when operating web browsers, software tools, and other interactive environments. Existing work mostly treats memory as a supply problem, asking what experience to write, how to store it, and which entry to retrieve for the next task. Yet we still lack a clear account of how models consume retrieved memory across a multi-step action trajectory. This consumption process matters because it determines not only what memories should be retrieved, but also what models and control policies are needed to use them safely. To diagnose this process, we propose Entry--Propagation--Recovery (E-P-R), a trajectory-level framework that asks where memory first changes an action, whether that change carries forward, and whether the agent can recover after leaving a correct path. We instantiate E-P-R on WebArena and on MemTrapBench, a controlled benchmark we build to isolate these phases. We find that the main failure often begins at entry: agents adopt conflicting memory at the first exposed decision point even when it is task-wrong. Repeated exposure then amplifies this early error, while recovery after divergence is weak. Together, these effects create a compliance trap: across models, conflicting memory induces similar compliance rates, but once agents comply, their success rates collapse to a low floor. Stronger agents therefore suffer larger absolute damage because each compliance event erases more baseline capability. These results suggest that memory-augmented agents should be evaluated not only by retrieval quality or final success rate, but by how they consume memory throughout the trajectory.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.AIcs.IR2026-07-23

Agentic Context Management: Solving Agent Memory and Cost by Treating Them as Lifecycle and Architecture Problems

Gaurav Dadhich

Production AI agents' failures are less often due to an inability to reason well and more often because they cannot manage what is in their reasoning context: conversation histories, large prompts, large tool definitions, and ballooning tool outputs. Agents drown in their own acc…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AIcs.MAcs.SE2026-07-31

Beyond Component Testing: Validating Agentic AI Systems

Fabio Orazio Mirto, Luca D'Agati, Giuseppe Tricomi, Stefano Silvestri, Francesco Longo, Antonio Puliafito, et al.

Agentic AI systems act through multi-step trajectories that combine planning, tool use, memory, interaction, and adaptation. This behavior stretches validation practice beyond component testing and one-shot input--output evaluation, because acceptable system behavior now depends…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AI2026-07-31

Tool Specifications Matter: Uncovering and Mitigating Safety Risks in AI Agents

Minghui Pan, Jiayuxuan Yang, Yuanyuan Yuan, Yu Jiang, Zhenpeng Chen

AI agents extend large language models (LLMs) with external tools, enabling them to perform complex tasks and translate model outputs into consequential real-world actions. Yet LLMs often become substantially less safe when deployed as agents, and the source of this degradation r…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AI2026-07-23

AttriMem: Attribution-Guided Process Feedback for Agent Memory Learning

Qinfeng Li, Yuntai Bao, Xinyan Yu, Hongze Chen, Wenqi Zhang, Xuhong Zhang

Effective memory is crucial for LLM agents, yet constructing it effectively remains challenging. A memory-construction policy decides what information to extract, store, update, compress, or discard as interactions accumulate. Heuristic memory methods rely on subjective, task-spe…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AI2026-07-23

Regulating autonomous and agentic AI

Chris Reed, Alex Austria, Anmol Bharuka, Pragnitha Mandava, Khushiya Mujawar, Luka Shakhkulashvili

Regulating activities where regulatees use autonomous and agentic AI is challenging. Regulatory assumptions about regulatee knowledge and control no longer hold true; much of that lies elsewhere in the AI supply chain which thus needs to be brought within the scope of regulation.…

View free PDFSource page