Skip to content
Preprint

Five Primitives for Governing Autonomous AI Agents at Runtime

Aug 2026 · 1 citation · 16 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

It is argued that governing such agents is a runtime problem -- not a model-alignment problem and not a build-time problem -- and five primitives are derived from the questions that must be answered before an action takes effect and after it has: discovery, identity, governance, attestation, and supply chain.

Abstract

Enterprise deployments of autonomous AI agents inherit a control model built for human users and long-lived services, and the fit fails in three specific ways: agent principals are ephemeral, appearing and vanishing faster than provisioning; their actions are selected by a model rather than programmed, so the set of things they may attempt is not known in advance; and the population is discovered rather than provisioned, because anyone who can call an API can create one. We argue that governing such agents is a runtime problem -- not a model-alignment problem and not a build-time problem -- and we derive five primitives from the questions that must be answered before an action takes effect and after it has: discovery, identity, governance, attestation, and supply chain. For each we state what fails if it is absent and why the others cannot structurally supply it. We describe an implementation in which an agent's action is mediated against policy before it takes effect, authorised against a per-tenant action vocabulary, and recorded in a hash-linked signed ledger a third party can verify with the vendor out of the loop. We report what the architecture costs: the enforcement point sits on the request's critical path, identity requires a sidecar per workload, and fail-closed mediation converts availability incidents into denial. We are explicit about implementation status: four primitives are built and running in private pilots, and the fifth is built as separate tooling and not yet integrated into the request path. We keep it in the set deliberately: a five-part decomposition that exactly matches what its authors happened to build is not a taxonomy but a description of a codebase.

View source

Similar papers

Open access Aug 2026

Do you know what your AI agent can do on its own?

A two-dimensional design space is introduced in which both dimensions are organised into five operational levels, making the coupling explicit and navigable, and six architectural tactics for adjusting a deployment’s position within it are proposed, offering a shared vocabulary for compliance-aware agentic AI design.

D. Safin, Dian Baltaa, Timon Sengewaldb et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Multi-Agent AI Safety as an Institutional Design Problem

This is the first paper from POLIS, an ongoing research programme studying algorithmic institutions for multi-agent systems, and asks which parts of an AI institution produce safety and how they do it.

X. Abdullah · 1 citation
Review Jul 2026

Specifying the Delegated-Autonomy Boundary: Requirements Engineering for Agentic AI

This paper proposes two complementary artifacts: an Agency Justification Record (AJR) helps teams decide when an agent is warranted over simpler alternatives and an Agentic Delegation Policy (ADP) captures what must be specified for safe and effective development.

Chetan Arora, Andreas Vogelsang, Abbishek Sharma · 0 citations
Open access 2026

Deterministic Runtime Enforcement: The Execution Authority for Autonomous AI Agents

This paper introduces L-DREA, a deterministic runtime-enforcement architecture that generalizes Anderson’s 1972 reference-monitor primitive from mediation of data access to mediation of externally effective action, and six runtime invariants are established analytically.

Abhinandan Gill-Lakhowal · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Securing Agentic AI: From Per-Action Checks to Trajectory Assurance

Charting these challenges provides a roadmap toward trustworthy autonomous agent deployment: security must become a verifiable property of the architectures, protocols, and runtimes that govern agent behavior, rather than an optional layer of guidance.

Alireza Lotfi, Subangkar Karmaker Shanto, Imtiaz Karim et al. · 2 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Explaining AI Agents Through Execution Traces

This work presents a post-hoc XAI framework that transforms a lengthy agent's execution trace into a structured report and a faithful natural-language explanation explicitly grounded in its observable behavior, outperforming naive LLM-generated explanations.

Vittoria Vineis, Fabiano Veglianti, Lorenzo Antonelli et al. · 0 citations

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