BRIDGE: Selective Boundary Repair with Dependency Graph Evidence in Multi-Agent Systems

AI agents are increasingly used to solve complex, multi-step tasks, but existing multi-agent frameworks remain brittle as workflows grow in scale and depth. Small errors at intermediate stages can propagate through agent interactions, while insufficient grounding and weak verification mechanisms further limit reliability. We present Meta-Agent, a two-phase framework that automatically constructs and executes specialized multi-agent systems from natural-language task descriptions. In the construction phase, a task planner decomposes a problem into a directed acyclic graph of agent specifications with explicit input/output contracts and verification criteria. A web search module grounds each specification with external evidence, and a code generation module produces system prompts and tool configurations. A construction-time verification stage then validates generated artifacts and triggers targeted regeneration when failures are detected. In the execution phase, a coordinator dispatches subtasks across the agent graph while execution-time verification gates intermediate outputs. We further introduce a three-level error attribution mechanism that distinguishes local, upstream, and structural failures, enabling targeted recovery strategies ranging from localized retries to partial re-execution and re-decomposition. We evaluate Meta-Agent across coding, contextual learning, and open-ended reasoning tasks. Experiments against strong multi-agent baselines and ablation studies demonstrate consistent improvements in task success rate, error recovery, and workflow stability. The results highlight the importance of tightly integrating planning, grounding, and verification for building reliable multi-agent systems.

In LLM-based multi-agent systems (MAS), a local mistake can propagate as other agents build on it, turning a correctable error into a failed task. Diagnosing completed runs or repeatedly re-executing them to search for corrections does not provide a learned policy for intervening while execution is still in progress. We present Agent Runtime Inspection and Amendment (ARIA), a framework for learning when and how to repair ongoing multi-agent executions. Our key intuition is to turn execution-verified repairs into reusable supervision, moving repair search into data construction and training so that a learned model can intervene at runtime without repeatedly testing alternatives. First, we collect over 24{,}000 successful and failed trajectories across four multi-agent frameworks, six benchmarks, and eight host models. From these trajectories, we construct the ARIA dataset, to our knowledge the first large-scale dataset pairing failed multi-agent trajectories with execution-verified repairs. It contains 3{,}953 verified repair pairs, each specifying what went wrong, where to intervene, and how execution should continue. Then, we develop the ARIA framework for MAS-agnostic runtime inspection and amendment, designed to integrate with any MAS that exposes execution trajectories and supports continuation replacement. Using verified repairs as training examples, we teach a compact model to recognize when intervention is needed and how to correct an ongoing run. The aim is to learn repair strategies that apply to related failures in new configurations, rather than merely reproduce individual corrections. Finally, the trained ARIA model demonstrates strong repair performance in both post-hoc and runtime settings, with generalization to unseen frameworks and host models. Our code is available at https://github.com/LabRAI/ARIA.

Many complex tasks require extended effort, diverse capabilities, or coordinated actions beyond what a single agent can provide. However, simply adding more agents does not guarantee better performance, as effective cooperation depends on how agents interact with each other and with task structure to satisfy evolving constraints over time. This challenge is amplified for LLM-based multi-agent systems (LLM-MAS): plans, messages, and revisions occur in natural language, whereas task progress depends on grounded environment actions. Current evaluations mostly treat cooperation as an implicit ingredient of final task success, leaving both cooperation and the effect of multi-agent interaction on task dynamics difficult to study. We introduce COOP$^2$, an evaluation framework that grounds high-level agent cooperation dynamics in LLM-MAS within task progress in the environment. COOP$^2$ then defines cooperative tasks with verifiable cooperative requirements, allowing us to analyze how cooperation unfolds over time with respect to task progress, as well as where and why cooperation breaks down. Building on this framework, we develop COOP$^2$-Repair, which predicts constraint failures from group plans and opens targeted repair channels for guided revisions. Across two environments and three communication structures, COOP$^2$-Repair improves task success and constraint satisfaction while exposing the additional decision overhead and communication load required for repair. The project web page can be found at: https://happyeureka.github.io/coop2.