Agentic Problem Frames: A Systematic Approach to Engineering Reliable Domain Agents
Organizations: Seoul National University · Institute of Engineering Research, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are evolving into autonomous agents, yet current "frameless" development--relying on ambiguous natural language without engineering blueprints--leads to critical risks such as scope creep and open-loop failures. To ensure industrial-grade reliability, this study proposes Agentic Problem Frames (APF), a systematic engineering framework that shifts focus from internal model intelligence to the structured interaction between the agent and its environment. The APF establishes a dynamic specification paradigm where intent is concretized at runtime through domain knowledge injection. At its core, the Act-Verify-Refine (AVR) loop functions as a closed-loop control system that transforms execution results into verified knowledge assets, driving system behavior toward asymptotic convergence to mission requirements (R). To operationalize this, this study introduces the Agentic Job Description (AJD), a formal specification tool that defines jurisdictional boundaries, operational contexts, and epistemic evaluation criteria. The efficacy of this framework is validated through two contrasting case studies: a delegated proxy model for business travel and an autonomous supervisor model for industrial equipment management. By applying AJD-based specification and APF modeling to these scenarios, the analysis demonstrates how operational scenarios are systematically controlled within defined boundaries. These cases provide a conceptual proof that agent reliability stems not from a model's internal reasoning alone, but from the rigorous engineering structures that anchor stochastic AI within deterministic business processes, thereby enabling the development of verifiable and dependable domain agents.
Figures & tables
| AJD Component | PF Mapping | Engineering Guidelines & Implementation Points |
|---|---|---|
| Mission | Requirement ( ) | The final goal state to be achieved in the world ( ). [Result-Oriented] Focus on "What" rather than "How." • Define the goal state (e.g., "Prevent accident" instead of "Stop equipment") to allow for reasoning autonomy. |
| Workplace | World ( ) | Physical/digital domains the machine interacts with. [Domain Isolation] Distinguish if the domain is Causal (API) or Biddable (User). • Define isolated side-effect boundaries for , etc. |
| Scope | Machine ( ) | Identity and jurisdictional boundaries of the machine. [Machine’s Authority] Specify permissions and negative constraints . • Use guardrails to prevent hallucinations and job deviation from the professional persona. |
| Operational Context | Spec ( ) | Information required to transform events into execution specifications ( ). [Late Binding] Inject the following at runtime: • Contexts : Real-time domain knowledge (RAG) and Scope/Authority boundaries. • Memory : Re-injection of verified success trajectories ( ). • Capabilities : Tool specifications (MCP/A2A). |
| Evaluation Method | Knowledge ( ) | Epistemic confirmation procedures to prove mission completion. [Epistemic Grounding] Design logic to finalize action results as knowledge: • Callback : Fact verification (Physical/Digital sensor data). • Confirm : Value verification (Explicit user approval). |
| AJD Item | PF Mapping | Engineering Specification ( ) |
|---|---|---|
| Mission | Requirement ( ) | [Minimize Administrative Effort] Minimize direct user intervention and cognitive effort by providing a completed itinerary through personalized scheduling and autonomous reservation. |
| Workplace | World ( ) | • : Subject of request and the final value approval domain. • : Internal email systems, groupware (calendars), etc. • : Airlines, railway systems, and hotel reservation APIs. |
| Scope | Machine ( ) | • [Identity] : Senior-level professionalism with deep awareness of corporate travel policies. • [Authority] : Permission for temporary bookings and submission of payment drafts within corporate limits. • [Boundary] : Strict blocking and warning for policy violations (e.g., unauthorized Business class). |
| Operational Context | Spec ( ) | • Contexts : Meeting schedules and corporate travel reimbursement guidelines. • Memory : Historical preferences (e.g., H-hotel in Haeundae or a preferred window seat). • Capabilities : Real-time API integration for transport and accommodation via MCP. |
| Evaluation Method | Knowledge ( ) | • Callback : Fact-checking by monitoring email for e-ticket/voucher issuance. • Confirm : Acquisition of explicit final approval from the user on the proposed itinerary. |
| AJD Item | PF Mapping | Engineering Specification ( ) |
|---|---|---|
| Mission | Requirement ( ) | [Optimize Safety and Uptime] Maintain an absolute safe state at all times while minimizing unplanned downtime through proactive intervention and rapid reporting. |
| Workplace | World ( ) | • : IoT Edge Agent (Intermediary for real-time sensing and control). • : ERP and maintenance management systems (Parts ordering and report storage). • : On-site safety and production managers (Final approvers). |
| Scope | Machine ( ) | • Authority : Detection of anomalies, emergency intervention (Edge control), root cause analysis, and drafting action reports. • Constraint : Prohibition of unauthorized restarts and final payment for parts without manager approval. |
| Operational Context | Spec ( ) | • Contexts : Equipment specifications, safety regulations, and failure diagnosis manuals. • Memory : Historical failure patterns and successful response trajectories. • Capabilities : A2A-based Edge communication and ERP system API integration. |
| Evaluation Method | Knowledge ( ) | • Callback : Physical verification of action results (e.g., confirming RPM=0 via sensor data). • Confirm : Assetization of knowledge through final approval of parts orders and root cause analysis reports. |
AI Agent Reliability
AI agent reliability studies whether tool-using systems act correctly, consistently, safely, and recoverably across changing tasks and environments.
See all 338 papers