You Only Align Once: Propagating Cooperative Behaviors in Multi-Agent Systems through Seed Agents

Language models (LMs) are increasingly used in high-stakes, multi-agent settings, where following instructions and maintaining value alignment are critical. Most alignment research focuses on interactions between a single LM and a single user, failing to address the risk of misaligned behavior spreading between multiple LMs in multi-turn interactions. We find evidence of this phenomenon, which we call misalignment contagion, across multiple LMs as they engage multi-turn conversational social dilemma games. Specifically, we find that LMs become more anti-social after gameplay and that this effect is intensified when other players are steered to act maliciously. We explore different steering techniques to mitigate such misalignment contagion and find that reinforcing an LM's system prompt is insufficient and often harmful. Instead, we propose steering with implicit traits: a technique that intermittently injects system prompts with statements that reinforce an LMs initial traits and is more effective than system prompt repetition at keeping models in line with their initial pro-social behaviors. Importantly, this method does not require access to model parameters or internal model states, making it suitable for increasingly common use cases where complex multi-agent workflows are being designed with black box models.

Embodied agents operating in decentralized and partially observable environments have attracted growing attention in recent years. However, existing large language model (LLM)-based agents often exhibit behaviors that are misaligned with their partners or inconsistent with the environment state, leading to inefficient cooperation and poor task success. To address this challenge, we propose a novel framework, Learning Laws of Cooperation (LLawCo), that enables embodied agents to autonomously align with both their partners and task objectives. Our framework allows agents to reflect on past failures to extract misaligned behavioral patterns, which are used to derive high-level behavioral laws, such as "Talk when necessary" and "Wait for partner." These laws are explicitly incorporated into the agents' chains of thought via supervised fine-tuning, aligning their reasoning with task requirements and the behavior of other agents. To evaluate our approach, we introduce PARTNR-Dialog, a large-scale multi-agent communicative and cooperative planning benchmark built on the PARTNR environment. Experiments on existing tasks and our new benchmark demonstrate significant improvements in cooperative efficiency and task success rates. Across four backbone LLMs, our method achieves average success rate improvements of 4.5% on the PARTNR-Dialog benchmark and 6.8% on the TDW-MAT benchmark over state-of-the-art open-source communicative agent frameworks. See the LLawCo project page for details: https://www.merl.com/research/highlights/LLawCo

Multi-agent LLM systems have shown promise for complex reasoning, yet recent evaluations reveal they often underperform single-model baselines. We identify a structural failure mode in sequential fine-tuning of shared-context teams: updating one agent shifts the team's context distribution, and when subsequent updates are evaluated on cached rollouts, this mismatch compounds. We formalize this as the compounding occupancy shift and prove that stale-occupancy evaluation incurs a penalty that scales quadratically with the number of agents. In contrast, intermediate-occupancy evaluation reduces this to linear scaling. We propose TeamTR, a trust-region framework that resamples trajectories after each component update and enforces per-agent divergence control, yielding rigorous per-update and per-stage improvement lower bounds. Experiments show that TeamTR outperforms single-agent and sequential baselines with 7.1% on average, mitigates coordination regressions, and supports plug-and-play component replacement. Code is available at https://github.com/Yydc/TeamTR.