Skip to content

Maat: Independent Deterministic Contract-Based Governance for Multi-Agent LLM Workflows

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 17 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

Maat is presented, a runtime governance layer that validates agent-to-agent handoffs against a versioned workflow contract, or anchor, with no language model in the validation or scoring path and the results support deterministic handoff validation for contract-expressible defects.

Abstract

Large-language-model multi-agent systems (LLM-MAS) introduce a characteristic reliability problem: an error produced by one agent can be accepted as context by downstream agents and propagate across the workflow. Many proposed safeguards rely on learned or LLM-based judges whose verdicts are themselves probabilistic; we ask whether a deterministic layer can instead stop contract-detectable handoff defects. We present Maat, a runtime governance layer that validates agent-to-agent handoffs against a versioned workflow contract, or anchor, with no language model in the validation or scoring path. We evaluate it in six controlled domain workflows (6-15 agents, 522 trials) with injected data-level defects and a deterministic seven-check rubric. Version 1 reported gains in all six workflows (2.9-26.5%). A post-publication audit found that three benchmark scorers credited any early halt as a prevented defect. On paired trials where the governed run completed or halted on a finding attributable to a verified defect, the rubric score changes by +7.7% to +29.1% in five workflows and is flat in software development; model-call cost falls 17-53% where attributable halts occur early. A hand review of all 94 governed-arm halts found 35 false alarms (37%), caused by validator defects rather than model behaviour; counting those halts as failed work, the governed arm scores below the ungoverned arm in four of six workflows. The results support deterministic handoff validation for contract-expressible defects and show that validator configuration and halt attribution must themselves be tested; they do not establish universal correctness, hallucination detection, or model-independent effectiveness.

View source

Similar papers

Open access Sep 2026

From DevOps to XOps: an agent-driven reference architecture for autonomous enterprise operations

XOps is proposed, a five-layer reference architecture integrating PlatformOps, DataOps, MLOps and AIOps beneath an Agentic Orchestration layer with Policy-as-Code governance, together with a continuous-time Markov chain model quantifying the availability effect of agent-driven remediation.

Mete Köse, E. Küçüksille · 0 citations
Open access 2026

RACE-SOC: Risk-Constrained Auditable Coordination Evaluation for LLM-Based Multi-Agent Security Operations

: Large language model (LLM) agents are now being used in security operations center (SOC) workflows to summarise security alerts, support triage, and suggest escalation or containment measures. Existing evaluations tend to focus on answer quality or benchmark accuracy, while the operational risks of multi-agent coordi...

Ying-Zeng Lv, Cheng Wang · 0 citations
Book Open access Oct 2026

SAGE: Source-Aligned Governance for Human–Agent Requirements Clarification in Multi-agent Software Engineering

Multi-agent large language model workflows are increasingly used in software engineering, yet requirements clarification under human–agent collaboration remains weakly governed. Much of the rework reflects requirement-chain desynchronization: negotiated intent, workflow contracts, and signed deliverables evolve on sepa...

Ting-Ting Feng, Mei-Fang Xue, Jian Wang et al. · 0 citations
Review Aug 2026

ClawSentry: A Progressive Multi-Tier Security Monitor for Safeguarding Autonomous LLM Agents

This work argues that agentic risk is progressive: it can enter at four loci of the agent control loop--skill admission, invocation-time intent, execution-time effect, and post-action consequence--while a denied dangerous objective can reappear across surface forms, tools, or turns.

Kai Wang, Zeming Wei, Biaojie Zeng et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

SoK: Decentralized Agent Economic Infrastructure

Decentralized agent economies increasingly build a single task from protocols that were designed and secured separately. This creates a simple problem: a workflow can look correct at each step and still produce the wrong outcome. For example, a correct escrow may release payment on an authorized approval that provides...

Rui Sun, Xi-Han Xiong, Qin Wang et al. · 0 citations
Open access Oct 2026

FROM AIOPS TO AGENTOPS: SERVICE-LEVEL OBJECTIVES AND ERROR-BUDGET-GOVERNED AUTONOMY FOR PRODUCTION AI AGENTS

Large language model (LLM) agents now run production workflows, including IT and network operations, yet they are usually monitored with signals designed for deterministic services: availability, latency, and error rate. An agent can satisfy all three while completing the wrong task. This paper extends AIOps-style serv...

A. Solanke · 0 citations

Related blog posts

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.