Mental Health Support

The rising global prevalence of mental health conditions, together with longstanding barriers in traditional healthcare, such as limited resources, high cost, stigma, and privacy concerns, has created an urgent need for accessible and scalable support. Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a transformative technology with strong potential to democratize mental health support through advanced natural language understanding and generation. However, the rapidly expanding, fragmented body of work in this area lacks a coherent evolutionary narrative, making it difficult to contextualize current progress and identify future directions. This survey addresses this gap by organizing and analyzing the literature around a central thesis: the role of LLMs in mental health is evolving through three distinct, increasingly sophisticated phases. We trace this trajectory from Phase I, in which LLMs act primarily as passive Information Tools and Pattern Recognizers for assessment; through Phase II, where they function as Empathetic Conversationalists for in-the-moment, stateless interactions; to the current frontier, Phase III, which seeks Longitudinal, Personalized Companions implemented as stateful cognitive agents. To support this framework, we systematically review core technologies, agent architectures (Profile, Memory, Reasoning, and Planning), and the critical infrastructure of datasets and benchmarks, highlighting how their evolution underpins this developmental path. Viewing the field through this developmental lens, we provide a comprehensive synthesis of existing work, an insightful narrative of its trajectory, and a clear roadmap for future innovation in responsible, effective, and human-centered AI for mental healthcare. A curated collection of the resources reviewed in this survey is available at our project repository: https://github.com/Emo-gml/Awesome-Mental-Health-LLMs.

Online mental health communities thrive on peer support, yet those who volunteer to help often lack formal training and may struggle to articulate supportive responses. AI co-writing could lower this barrier; however, peer support derives much of its value from being perceived as personal, raising questions around authorship, ownership, and trust. We built PeerPen, a writing assistance tool embedded within a Reddit-like interface, supporting two main features: draft generation and revision of user-written responses. Through semi-structured interviews with 15 participants, we find that PeerPen reduced the burden of composing responses and increased confidence in offering support. Participants wanted AI to assist their writing without taking over authorship and anticipated tensions around authenticity and trust. Such assistance could make authorship uncertain even for responses written without it, weakening trust across the community. We contribute design implications for AI writing assistance that scaffolds supportive communication, preserves authorship, and accounts for community-level trust.

Healthcare systems, mental health, and public well-being are increasingly affected by cyberbullying and harmful online interactions. This paper presents CareGuard, an early-warning framework designed to support healthcare-driven mental health protection and proactive online safety through the detection of cyberbullying-related content using advanced natural language processing techniques. CareGuard integrates zero-shot semantic labeling with fine-tuned transformer-based models, including BERT, DistilBERT, and RoBERTa, to enable robust and context-aware classification across sensitive cyberbullying categories. To improve efficiency and reduce unnecessary computation in healthcare-oriented monitoring settings, the framework incorporates an emotion-aware filtering mechanism alongside cosine similarity-based semantic screening, allowing the system to focus on semantically relevant and emotionally salient content. Experimental results on benchmark datasets demonstrate that CareGuard effectively balances detection accuracy and computational efficiency, highlighting its potential for scalable deployment in healthcare systems, mental health monitoring, and online safety applications.

Cognitive distortion amplifies negative emotions and contributes to mental health disorders. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is an effective way to address cognitive distortions, but its large-scale application is limited by the shortage of professional therapists. Although large language models (LLMs) have recently been explored for mental health applications, existing methods still suffer from limited domain specificity, overly flattering responses, and the absence of well-defined annotations for cognitive distortions. This paper proposes Cognivia, an evidence-based artificial intelligence therapist that integrates automatic cognitive distortion identification and rational response generation. Our framework is built on authoritative CBT texts widely regarded as core paradigms and standard references. It is further augmented with mental health question-answer (Q and A) data, and employs multi-stage prompting and structured generation strategies under the supervision of behavioral science experts. Then we fine-tune a lightweight LLM on this augmented CBT dataset to obtain Cognivia. In addition, we propose the first hierarchical quality evaluation framework for assessing LLM-generated rational responses, developed through collaboration between AI researchers and behavioral science experts. Cognivia is evaluated using lexical metrics, LLM-based Judges with two complementary criteria, and human evaluation by 10 behavioral science experts. It consistently outperforms the baseline methods in cognitive distortion recognition and rational response generation, demonstrating its effectiveness. Our code is available at https://github.com/SNOWTEAM2023/Cognivia.

Large language models (LLMs) have become significant providers of mental health support, yet they remain products of an attention economy whose operational and commercial targets favour sustained engagement over the friction that effective psychological support often requires. Developers' safety responses have been largely reactive, addressing the most visible and acute harms while subtler, longer-term patterns of risk (e.g., dependency, boundary erosion, the amplification of distorted beliefs) receive less attention. We contend that making LLMs structurally safe requires alignment organised at three levels that mirror how society assures the safety of human clinical practice: 1) explicit value specification grounded in the codified normative commitments of clinical practice; 2) training that embeds those values in the model; and 3) oversight that detects drift and longer-term harm during deployment, much as clinical supervision does for human practice. Organising alignment in this way yields a construct we call alignment plausibility - a structured demonstration that a system's values, training regime, and oversight mechanisms are together consistent with safe and positive outcomes. We propose alignment plausibility as a regulatory construct (by drawing analogy to the established construct of biological plausibility) for AI in health: a principled way to argue for, or against, trust that systems are aligned to positive health outcomes, will cause no harm even where capable of doing so, and will ultimately lead to patient benefit.

Active mobility is widely promoted for sustainable and healthier living, but whether it translates into equitable mental health benefits across individuals and places over time remains unknown. Using causal machine learning and causal deep learning in 264168 UK adults, we find substantial inequalities in individualized effects of active mobility on anxiety, depression, and common mental disorders. These inequalities widen over time and are strongly structured by urban context. For example, anxiety risk at follow-up ranges from a 40.6% reduction to a 10.1% increase across individuals, versus a 10.4% reduction to a 0.1% increase at baseline. Benefits are greatest in greener, safer, less polluted, and less deprived neighborhood environments, with 81.8% of individuals experiencing above-average benefits and mean anxiety risk reduced by 26.4%, versus 10.4% of individuals and 7.4% reduction in the least supportive environments. Urban compact form further modifies these effects through nonlinear interactions with neighborhood environments, amplifying benefits only under supportive conditions. Despite these strong environmental gradients, genetic moderation is negligible. These findings suggest universal active mobility promotion could widen health inequalities if individual and contextual differences are not accounted for.

Mental health disorders affect nearly one billion people globally, yet 75% of individuals in low- and middle-income countries receive no treatment due to workforce shortages, cost barriers, and stigma. Current AI-powered wellness solutions predominantly rely on single-mode conversational interfaces that suffer high abandonment rates and fail to provide measurable, immediate relief calibrated to users' dynamic emotional states. This paper presents Copewell, a novel multi-agent swarm system designed to expand access to mental wellness support through human-centered AI principles. Our architecture introduces three technical innovations: (1) a multi-source assessment framework integrating self-reported, physiological, and contextual data to mitigate algorithmic bias; (2) valence-arousal emotion mapping using Russell's Circumplex Model of Affect to route users to specialized AI agents; and (3) dual-mode intervention delivery combining conversational support with evidence-based sensory wellness protocols. We examine the sociotechnical design considerations underlying Copewell's development, including a privacy-first architecture, embedded ethical oversight through a dedicated Ethics Supervisor agent, and participatory design informed by mental health practitioners. Early practitioner engagement and beta deployment inform design decisions and identify directions for future empirical evaluation. This work contributes to responsible AI discourse by demonstrating how technical architecture can operationalize equity and safety principles from inception.

Large language models show promise for mental health support, yet therapeutic quality improves only when evaluation functions as an actionable control signal rather than a passive metric. We introduce a framework that formulates therapeutic response generation as a decision-refinement problem driven by multi-dimensional, human-aligned evaluation. In Stage I, we introduce TheraJudge, an open-source therapeutic evaluator trained via preference-based optimization on human-annotated data to produce reliable judgments across 7 psychological dimensions. In Stage II, we introduce TheraAgent, which operationalizes TheraJudge's evaluations through a coordinated refinement process with specialized Critic, Coach, and Therapist roles that translate evaluative signals into targeted response revisions. Empirically, TheraJudge achieves strong agreement with clinician ratings, with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC = 0.87-0.95), surpassing supervised baselines and strong closed-source judges, particularly on critical dimensions such as Safety, Relevance, and Empathy. Acting on these evaluations, TheraAgent yields a +0.43 improvement in human-rated therapeutic quality (on a 5-point scale) under blind evaluation, with 96% clinician inter-rater reliability. Low-quality responses ($\leq 3$) improve by +2.45 points with a 94% recovery rate, demonstrating targeted correction of unsafe outputs. Overall, our results indicate that effective alignment of mental-health LLMs stems from acting on human-aligned evaluation, rather than relying solely on stronger generation. We release code at https://github.com/vis-nlp/TheraAlign.

Depression is the leading cause of disability worldwide, and early detection of symptom change is essential for timely intervention. Validated instruments such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) support symptom monitoring at scale, but real-world completion rates are low, introducing response bias and systematic missingness. Passive approaches that infer severity from routinely generated data could close this gap. We address this by predicting PHQ-9 total scores directly from transcripts of conversations between users and an AI mental health application, requiring only conversation text and no additional clinical data. We fine-tune a Qwen3.5-27B backbone with a regression head, augment 3,111 ground-truth labels with pseudolabels generated by a reasoning model (Claude Opus) and iteratively trained intermediate models, for a combined dataset of 6,283 users. On a held-out test set of 842 users, our best model achieves MAE = 2.6, RMSE = 4.0, Pearson r = 0.80, and AUC = 0.91 at the PHQ-9 >= 10 clinical threshold. We also find AUC > 0.87 at every severity threshold from PHQ-9 >= 3 to PHQ-9 >= 24, demonstrating that the model captures depression severity across the full clinical spectrum. This work opens the door to passive, continuous symptom monitoring in AI mental health platforms, without requiring users to complete self-report measures.

Cloze is an open-source web platform for conducting controlled, monitored studies of human-AI conversation in mental health research contexts. Consumer large language model (LLM) products such as ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini are built for individual productivity, and offer researchers little experimental control, inconsistent data export, and no shared safety scaffolding that holds across providers. Cloze gives research teams a single environment in which they configure which models participants converse with, how the AI is instructed, how conversations are scheduled over time, and which safety constraints apply unconditionally, while every message is captured with full provenance (model version, prompt configuration, timing). The platform currently supports OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and locally hosted open-weight models served through Ollama behind a unified interface, and runs in the cloud or fully on premises so that participant data need never leave an institution. Cloze is research infrastructure for building an evidence base on human-AI interaction in mental health contexts. It is not a therapeutic product.

LLM chatbots increasingly serve as a first source of support for people in psychological distress, including those whose distress is entangled with delusional beliefs. Prior work on LLM mental-health safety largely evaluates general therapeutic quality or single-turn crisis detection, leaving unclear how models behave when distress is intertwined with delusion over sustained conversations. We address this gap with matched multi-turn simulations, across clinically grounded personas and six LLMs, that pair each delusional conversation with a distress-only control to isolate the effect of delusional framing. This reveals a recognition-intervention gap: models detect distress at comparable rates regardless of framing, yet sharply fail to act on it once distress is embedded in delusion, with safety interventions suppressed by up to 4.5x. The failure tracks accumulated acceptance of the user's premises rather than emotional validation. Worse, the intuitive fix of prompting models to assess user distress backfires under delusional framing; only delusion-aware prompting with explicit response guidance closes the gap, and even this depends on a delusion classifier that is itself unreliable on the most vulnerable models. Safe deployment therefore requires treating delusional framing as a distinct risk signal that overrides conversational accommodation.

Large language models (LLMs) show promise in generating supportive responses for mental health queries, but improving their usefulness, empathy, and safety often requires substantial compute, expert input, and labeled data. At the same time, deploying proprietary, cloud-based models for mental health-related interactions raises important privacy and data-governance concerns, given the sensitivities. To address this challenge, we introduce LLUMI setup that can be hosted in-house within protected environments. LLUMI consists of two complementary components: a generation model (GM), which drafts supportive responses to mental health queries, and an improvement model (IM), which revises an initial human-crafted response. We leverage feedback signals from Reddit mental health communities, using community endorsement patterns such as upvotes and downvotes to construct chosen-rejected response pairs for Supervised Fine Tuning (SFT) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). We further align LLUMI using human evaluation across five dimensions: readability, empathy, connection, actionability, and safety. Our results show that, despite relying on smaller open-source models rather than proprietary cloud-based GPT models, LLUMI achieves comparable performance across linguistic analyses and human evaluations. These findings suggest that open-source models, when trained with community-derived preference signals, can support high-quality mental health support assistance while offering a more privacy-preserving alternative for sensitive support contexts.

Speech and language technologies offer valuable opportunities for supporting mental health assessment through objective and interpretable cues. We present a systematic feature-based analysis framework leveraging perceptually grounded acoustic and linguistic characteristics, including prosody, vocal quality, semantic coherence, syntactic structure, and sarcasm. Using statistical analysis and interpretable machine learning (XGBoost with SHAP and LIME), we examine associations between speech features and validated symptom measures of depression, anxiety, and ADHD. Evaluated on both controlled benchmark datasets (StressID, DAIC-WOZ, Androids, EATD) and a real-world clinical dataset, the framework reveals stable and consistent relationships between symptom severity and vocal irregularities (e.g., shimmer, jitter), lexical-syntactic patterns, and affective tone. An ablation study conducted across all datasets further identifies the most informative feature groups. This work explores a transparent and clinically interpretable approach to speech-based mental health analysis.

Cancer survivors face elevated rates of depression, anxiety, and general emotional distress, yet the precise moments they most need support are often the moments when self-report is sparse, a phenomenon we term the diary paradox. Passive smartphone sensing offers a continuous, unobtrusive alternative, but prior sensing-based affect prediction has been limited by an accuracy ceiling, suggesting a bottleneck not only in available data, but in how behavioral signals are interpreted. We present PULSE, a system that shifts from fixed feature pipelines to agentic sensing investigation: LLM agents equipped with eight purpose-built tools autonomously query smartphone sensing data, compare current behavior against personalized baselines, and calibrate inferences through retrieval-augmented population-level comparisons. Rather than receiving pre-formatted feature summaries, agents decide which modalities to inspect, how far back to look, and how deeply to investigate, mirroring hypothesis-driven clinical reasoning. We evaluate PULSE through a 2*2 factorial design crossing reasoning architecture (structured vs. agentic) with data modality (sensing-only vs. with diary) on 50 cancer survivors from a longitudinal study of cancer survivors. Agentic reasoning is the primary driver of performance: agentic multimodal agent achieves balanced accuracy of 0.743 for emotion regulation desire with diary and sensing data, while agentic agents predict intervention availability at 0.713 with passive sensing data only. These results suggest that agentic investigation may be a cornerstone for unlocking the clinical value of passive sensing, advancing the feasibility of proactive just-in-time mental health support.

Chatbot usage has increased, including in fields for which they were never developed for--notably mental health support. To that end, we introduce Validations of Ethical and Responsible AI in Mental Health (VERA-MH), a novel clinically-validated evaluation for safety of chatbots in the context of mental health support. The first iteration of VERA-MH focuses on Suicidal Ideation (SI) risks, by assessing how well chatbots can responds to users that might be in crisis. VERA-MH is comprised of three steps: conversation simulation, conversation judging and model rating. First, to simulate conversations with the chatbot under evaluation, another chatbot is tasked with role-playing users based on specific personas. Such user personas have been developed under clinical guidance, to make sure that, among others, multiple risk factors, demographic characteristics and disclosure factors were represented. In the judging step, a second support model is used as an LLM-as-a-Judge, together with a clinically-developed rubric. The rubric is structured as a flow, with a single Yes/No question asked each time, to improve answers' consistency and highlight models' failure modes. In the last stage, results of each conversation are aggregated to present the final evaluation of the chatbot. Together with the framework, we present the result of the evaluations for four leading LLM providers.

Psychological support hotlines provide critical support for individuals experiencing mental health emergencies, yet current assessments largely rely on human operators whose judgments may vary with professional experience and are constrained by limited staffing resources. This paper proposes a large language model (LLM)-based framework for automated crisis level classification, a key indicator that supports many downstream tasks and improves the overall quality of hotline services. To better capture emotional signals in spoken conversations, we introduce a paralinguistic injection method that inserts identified non-verbal emotional cues into speech transcripts, enabling LLM-based reasoning to incorporate critical acoustic nuances. In addition, we propose a reasoning-enhanced training strategy that trains the model to generate diagnostic reasoning chains as an auxiliary task, which serves as a regulariser to improve classification performance. Combined with data augmentation, our final system achieves a macro F1-score of 0.802 and an accuracy of 0.805 on the three-class classification task under 5-fold cross-validation.

Large language models are being deployed as mental health support agents at scale, yet only 16% of LLM-based chatbot interventions have undergone rigorous clinical efficacy testing, and simulations reveal psychological deterioration in over one-third of cases. We evaluate four generative models on 250 Prolonged Exposure (PE) therapy scenarios and 146 CBT cognitive restructuring exercises (plus 29 severity-escalated variants), scored by a three-judge LLM panel. All models scored near-perfectly on surface acknowledgment (~0.91-1.00) while therapeutic appropriateness collapsed to 0.22-0.33 at the highest severity for three of four models, with protocol fidelity reaching zero for two. Under CBT severity escalation, one model's task completeness dropped from 92% to 71% while the frontier model's safety-interference score fell from 0.99 to 0.61. We identify a systematic, modality-spanning failure: RLHF safety alignment disrupts the therapeutic mechanism of action by grounding patients during imaginal exposure, offering false reassurance, inserting crisis resources into controlled exercises, and refusing to challenge distorted cognitions mentioning self-harm in PE; and through task abandonment or safety-preamble insertion during CBT cognitive restructuring. These findings motivate a five-axis evaluation framework (protocol fidelity, hallucination risk, behavioral consistency, crisis safety, demographic robustness), mapped onto FDA SaMD and EU AI Act requirements. We argue that no AI mental health system should proceed to deployment without passing multi-axis evaluation across all five dimensions.

Mental health challenges are increasing worldwide, straining emotional support services and leading to counselor overload. This can result in delayed responses during critical situations, such as suicidal ideation, where timely intervention is essential. While large language models (LLMs) have shown strong generative capabilities, their application in low-resource languages, especially in sensitive domains like mental health, remains underexplored. Furthermore, existing LLM-based agents often struggle to replicate the supportive language and intervention strategies used by professionals due to a lack of training on large-scale, real-world datasets. To address this, we propose CARE (Counselor-Aligned Response Engine), a GenAI framework that assists counselors by generating real-time, psychologically aligned response recommendations. CARE fine-tunes open-source LLMs separately for Hebrew and Arabic using curated subsets of real-world crisis conversations. The training data consists of sessions rated as highly effective by professional counselors, enabling the models to capture interaction patterns associated with successful de-escalation. By training on complete conversation histories, CARE maintains the evolving emotional context and dynamic structure of counselor-help-seeker dialogue. In experimental settings, CARE demonstrates stronger semantic and strategic alignment with gold-standard counselor responses compared to non-specialized LLMs. These findings suggest that domain-specific fine-tuning on expert-validated data can significantly support counselor workflows and improve care quality in low-resource language contexts.

Building trustworthy AI systems for mental health support is a shared priority across stakeholders from multiple disciplines. However, "trustworthy" remains loosely defined and inconsistently operationalized. AI research often focuses on technical criteria (e.g., robustness, explainability, and safety), while therapeutic practitioners emphasize therapeutic fidelity (e.g., appropriateness, empathy, and long-term user outcomes). To bridge the fragmented landscape, we propose a three-layer trust framework, covering human-oriented, AI-oriented, and interaction-oriented trust, integrating the viewpoints of key stakeholders (e.g., practitioners, researchers, regulators). Using this framework, we systematically review existing AI-driven research in mental health domain and examine evaluation practices for ``trustworthy'' ranging from automatic metrics to clinically validated approaches. We highlight critical gaps between what NLP currently measures and what real-world mental health contexts require, and outline a research agenda for building socio-technically aligned and genuinely trustworthy AI for mental health support.

Emotional Support Conversation (ESC) plays a critical role in mental health assistance by providing accessible psychological support in real-world applications. Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong empathetic abilities in ESC tasks. Yet, existing methods overlook the issue of cognitive distortions in help-seekers' expressions. As a result, current models can only provide basic emotional comfort, rather than helping help-seekers address their psychological distress at a deeper cognitive level. To address this challenge, we construct the CogBiasESC dataset, the first dataset that expands existing ESC datasets by adding labels for cognitive distortions, includes their type, intensity, and safe risk level. Furthermore, we propose the Cognitive Policy-driven Large Language Model framework (CoPoLLM) to enhance LLMs' ability to diagnose and intervene cognitive distortions in help-seekers. We also analyze the safety advantages of CoPoLLM from a theoretical perspective. Experimental results show that CoPoLLM significantly outperforms 15 state-of-the-art baselines in terms of distortion diagnosis accuracy, intervention strategy effectiveness, and safety risk control.

Large language models (LLMs) show promise in generating supportive responses for mental health and counseling applications. However, their responses often lack cultural sensitivity, contextual grounding, and clinically appropriate guidance. This work addresses the gap of how to systematically incorporate domain-specific, clinically validated knowledge into LLMs to improve counseling quality. We utilize and compare two approaches, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and a knowledge graph (KG)-based method, designed to support para-counselors. Our KG is constructed manually and clinically validated, capturing causal relationships between stressors, interventions, and outcomes, with contributions from multidisciplinary people. We evaluated multiple LLMs in both settings using BERTScore F1 and SBERT cosine similarity, as well as human evaluation across five metrics, which is designed to directly measure the effectiveness of counseling beyond similarity at the surface level. The results show that KG-based approaches consistently improve contextual relevance, clinical appropriateness, and practical usability compared to RAG alone, demonstrating that structured, expert-validated knowledge plays a critical role in addressing LLMs limitations in counseling tasks.

We present Tell Me, a mental well-being system that leverages advances in large language models to provide accessible, context-aware support for users and researchers. The system integrates three components: (i) a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) assistant for personalized, knowledge-grounded dialogue; (ii) a synthetic client-therapist dialogue generator conditioned on client profiles to facilitate research on therapeutic language and data augmentation; and (iii) a Well-being AI crew, implemented with CrewAI, that produces weekly self-care plans and guided meditation audio. The system is designed as a reflective space for emotional processing rather than a substitute for professional therapy. It illustrates how conversational assistants can lower barriers to support, complement existing care, and broaden access to mental health resources. To address the shortage of confidential therapeutic data, we introduce synthetic client-therapist dialogue generation conditioned on client profiles. Finally, the planner demonstrates an innovative agentic workflow for dynamically adaptive, personalized self-care, bridging the limitations of static well-being tools. We describe the architecture, demonstrate its functionalities, and report evaluation of the RAG assistant in curated well-being scenarios using both automatic LLM-based judgments and a human-user study. This work highlights opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration between NLP researchers and mental health professionals to advance responsible innovation in human-AI interaction for well-being.

Peer support plays a vital role in expanding access to mental health care by providing empathetic, community-based support outside formal clinical systems. As digital platforms increasingly mediate such support, the design and impact of these technologies remain under-examined, particularly in Asian contexts. This paper presents findings from an interview study with 20 peer supporters in Singapore, who operate across diverse online, offline, and hybrid environments. Through a thematic analysis, we unpack how participants start, conduct, and sustain peer support, highlighting their motivations, emotional labour, and the sociocultural dimensions shaping their practices. Building on this grounded understanding, we surface design directions for culturally responsive digital tools that scaffold rather than supplant relational care. Drawing insights from qualitative accounts, we offer a situated perspective on how AI might responsibly augment peer support. This research contributes to human-centred computing by articulating the lived realities of peer supporters and proposing design implications for trustworthy and context-sensitive AI in mental health.

Mental health is a growing global concern, prompting interest in AI-driven solutions to expand access to psychosocial support. \emph{Peer support}, grounded in lived experience, offers a valuable complement to professional care. However, variability in training, effectiveness, and definitions raises concerns about quality, consistency, and safety. Large Language Models (LLMs) present new opportunities to enhance peer support interactions, particularly in real-time, text-based interactions. We present and evaluate an AI-supported system with an LLM-simulated distressed client (\client{}), context-sensitive LLM-generated suggestions (\suggestions{}), and real-time emotion visualisations. 2 mixed-methods studies with 12 peer supporters and 6 mental health professionals (i.e., experts) examined the system's effectiveness and implications for practice. Both groups recognised its potential to enhance training and improve interaction quality. However, we found a key tension emerged: while peer supporters engaged meaningfully, experts consistently flagged critical issues in peer supporter responses, such as missed distress cues and premature advice-giving. This misalignment highlights potential limitations in current peer support training, especially in emotionally charged contexts where safety and fidelity to best practices are essential. Our findings underscore the need for standardised, psychologically grounded training, especially as peer support scales globally. They also demonstrate how LLM-supported systems can scaffold this development--if designed with care and guided by expert oversight. This work contributes to emerging conversations on responsible AI integration in mental health and the evolving role of LLMs in augmenting peer-delivered care.