Papers › Composing Agents to Minimize Worst-case Risk

Composing Agents to Minimize Worst-case Risk

5 Jun 2025arXiv:2506.04632archive 2025-07-28

Guruprerana Shabadi, Rajeev Alur

From software development to robot control, modern agentic systems decompose complex objectives into a sequence of subtasks and choose a set of specialized AI agents to complete them. We formalize an agentic workflow as a directed acyclic graph, called an agent graph, where edges represent AI agents and paths correspond to feasible compositions of agents. When deploying these systems in the real world, we need to choose compositions of agents that not only maximize the task success, but also minimize risk where the risk captures requirements like safety, fairness, and privacy. This additionally requires carefully analyzing the low-probability (tail) behaviors of compositions of agents. In this work, we consider worst-case risk minimization over the set of feasible agent compositions. We define worst-case risk as the tail quantile -- also known as value-at-risk -- of the loss distribution of the agent composition where the loss quantifies the risk associated with agent behaviors. We introduce an efficient algorithm that traverses the agent graph and finds a near-optimal composition of agents by approximating the value-at-risk via a union bound and dynamic programming. Furthermore, we prove that the approximation is near-optimal asymptotically for a broad class of practical loss functions. To evaluate our framework, we consider a suite of video game-like control benchmarks that require composing several agents trained with reinforcement learning and demonstrate our algorithm's effectiveness in approximating the value-at-risk and identifying the optimal agent composition.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

4 samples harvested; 2 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 4 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from guruprerana/worm. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections