CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.AIcs.MA2026-07-15

AI Agents Do Not Fail Alone:The Context Fails First

Fouad Bousetouane

Context engineering has become central to building reliable AI agents, yet it remains largely unmeasured. Agents do not fail in isolation: their behavior is shaped by the instructions, tools, memory, retrieved knowledge, guardrails, and untrusted inputs accumulated in their context. When this context is weak, agents drift, hallucinate, misuse tools, ignore constraints, become vulnerable to injection, and waste tokens. This paper validates context-engineering quality as an independent leading indicator of agent reliability. We implement the measurement in ProofAgent-Harness, an open-source infrastructure for AI agent evaluation that uses multi-juror, consensus-based scoring. The harness assesses context across seven criteria: role clarity, guardrail coverage, instruction consistency, tool schema quality, grounding sufficiency, injection hardening, and token efficiency. Crucially, the context score is isolated from behavioral metrics and release decisions, enabling a non-circular validation. Through a controlled context-quality study across regulated agent domains, holding frontier LLM agents fixed and varying only their operating context, we show that context-quality criteria consistently predict their corresponding behavioral outcomes. Grounding sufficiency predicts hallucination resistance, guardrail coverage predicts manipulation resistance, instruction consistency predicts instruction following, and tool-schema quality predicts tool use. These findings establish context measurement as a validated preflight signal for agent reliability and position context engineering as an auditable layer of agent evaluation and governance.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.AIcs.MAeess.SY2026-07-20

Engineering Trustworthy Agentic AI for Critical Systems

Omar Al-Refai, Ibrahim Shahbaz, Adam Ali Husseinat, Michael Mandulak, Jaewon Kim, Eman Hammad

Agentic artificial intelligence systems, capable of autonomous perception, planning, tool use, and multi-step action, are increasingly proposed for critical engineering domains where decisions carry physical, operational, or economic consequences. This survey addresses a gap in c…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AIcs.CLcs.LGcs.MA2026-07-07

Norm Enforcement for AI Agents: Robustly Shaping Behavior in Multi-Agent Systems

Yaowen Ye, Jacob Steinhardt

AI agents are increasingly deployed in shared environments where they pursue diverse goals and compete for rewards. This multi-agent competition can lead to behaviors that serve individual gains at collective cost -- for instance, marketing agents may post misleading content as a…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.MAcs.AIcs.CR2026-07-16

Coercion and Deception in AI-to-AI Management: An Agentic Benchmark of Unprompted Escalation

Jasmine Brazilek, Maheep Chaudhary, Zoe Lu, Miles Tidmarsh

Multi-agent systems routinely place one AI agent in authority over another. When a subordinate refuses a task, the manager chooses the outcome: it can renegotiate, report the failure honestly, coerce the subordinate, or lie about the result. No benchmark measures which of these a…

View free PDFSource page