LLM Guardrails
LLM: Large Language Model
Overview
LLM guardrails assess prompts, generated responses, and multi-step agent actions for harmful content, policy violations, prompt injection, and unsafe tool use. Common approaches include specialized classifiers and LLM judges, hidden-state or logit probes, streaming monitors, and runtime controls such as policy-as-code, constrained decoding, and formal verification. Evaluations span moderation and jailbreak benchmarks such as HarmBench, agent-task settings such as AgentDojo and τ²-Bench, and domain-specific, multilingual, and long-context tests. The field’s central tension is balancing missed risks against over-refusal, latency, and cost, while determining whether strong benchmark scores translate into safer end-to-end systems.
Latest papers
195 papers30 papers in the last four weeks, up 43% on the four weeks before. 0.2% of all new papers.
One Turn Too Late: Learning When to Intervene Against Multi-Turn Malicious Intent
Who Decides What Is Harmful? Content Moderation Policy Through A Multi-Agent Personalised Inference Framework
BabelSafe: A Policy-Grounded Multilingual Safety Benchmark for LLMs
Safeguarding LLM Agents from Misalignment through Provenance Analysis
Evaluating Epistemic Guardrails in AI Reading Assistants: A Behavioral Audit of a Minimal Prototype
BARRED: Synthetic Training of Custom Policy Guardrails via Asymmetric Debate
A Comparative Evaluation of AI Agent Security Guardrails
UNSEEN: A Cross-Stack LLM Unlearning Defense against AR-LLM Social Engineering Attacks
Shift-Up: A Framework for Software Engineering Guardrails in AI-native Software Development -- Initial Findings
SafeRedirect: Defeating Internal Safety Collapse via Task-Completion Redirection in Frontier LLMs
LLM Safety From Within: Detecting Harmful Content with Internal Representations
Harness as an Asset: Enforcing Determinism via the Convergent AI Agent Framework (CAAF)
TWGuard: A Case Study of LLM Safety Guardrails for Localized Linguistic Contexts
Don't Make Models Guess Security and Safety: Symbolic Guardrails for Domain-Specific AI Agents
Bounded Autonomy for Enterprise AI: Typed Action Contracts and Consumer-Side Execution
Model Capability Assessment and Safeguards for Biological Weaponization
ProbeLogits: Kernel-Level LLM Inference Primitives for AI-Native Operating Systems
Guardrails Beat Guidance: A Large-Scale Study of Rules, Skills, and Persistent Configuration for Coding Agents
CLAUDE.md, .cursorrules, and the broader family of agent skills, plugin manifests, and persona definitions): we scrape 679 rule files (25{,}532 rules) from GitHub and conduct over 5{,}000 agent runs of Claude Code with Claude Opus 4.6 on SWE-bench Verified. Three patterns emerge. (i) Rule polarity cleanly separates beneficial from harmful rules; we read this through the lens of potential-based reward shaping (PBRS). (ii) Performance gains are largely content-independent: random, shuffled, mismatched-domain, and unconverted-format rule files all match curated rules, pointing to a context priming mechanism. (iii) Individual rules often appear harmful in isolation yet do not visibly accumulate damage in ensemble: pass rates remain stable across rule counts from 0 to 50. These findings expose a hidden reliability risk in the rapidly growing ecosystem of community-authored rules and skills, and they yield a clear principle for safer agent configuration: constrain what agents must not do, rather than prescribing what they should.