CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning May 26, 2026

Methods for Formal Verification of Agent Skills: Three Layers Toward a Mechanically Checkable Capability-Containment Proof

arXiv AI Archived May 26, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2605.23951v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The companion paper introduced a four-level verification lattice on agent-skill manifests (unverified, declared, tested, formal) and left the top level aspirational. This paper closes that gap. We give a precise semantics for skill behaviour faithful to how a skill is consumed by an LLM-driven runtime (a deterministic script-side reachable through a non-deterministic LLM-side), state the verification problem as a capability-containment property ove

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 9 May 2026] Methods for Formal Verification of Agent Skills: Three Layers Toward a Mechanically Checkable Capability-Containment Proof Alfredo Metere The companion paper introduced a four-level verification lattice on agent-skill manifests (unverified, declared, tested, formal) and left the top level aspirational. This paper closes that gap. We give a precise semantics for skill behaviour faithful to how a skill is consumed by an LLM-driven runtime (a deterministic script-side reachable through a non-deterministic LLM-side), state the verification problem as a capability-containment property over that semantics, and present three composable methods that together raise a skill from declared or tested to formal: (1) sound static capability-containment analysis of the script-side via abstract interpretation over a small effect lattice; (2) a refinement type system for tool-call envelopes that mechanically rejects any call whose statically-inferred capability is not in the manifest's declared set; (3) SMT-bounded model checking against the parent paper's biconditional correctness criterion, with the bound chosen so any counter-example fitting the runtime's transaction-buffer horizon is exhibited as a concrete trace. We prove the three layers composed soundly cover the parent paper's threat model modulo a single residual (the LLM's freedom to refuse to act) that the parent paper's runtime biconditional catches at session boundary. The methods reuse existing well-engineered tools (Z3, Semgrep, CodeQL, refinement-type checkers, mechanised proof assistants) rather than asking operators to build new ones, and the proof-carrying artifact extends the existing this http URL convention. All three methods plus the bundle producer and re-checker ship as zero-dependency JavaScript modules in the open-source enclawed framework (this https URL project page this https URL), with 53 unit tests and an end-to-end CLI demo on a sample skill. Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Logic in Computer Science (cs.LO); Multiagent Systems (cs.MA) Cite as: arXiv:2605.23951 [cs.AI]   (or arXiv:2605.23951v1 [cs.AI] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.23951 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Alfredo Metere [view email] [v1] Sat, 9 May 2026 19:27:38 UTC (45 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.AI < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-05 Change to browse by: cs cs.LO cs.MA References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv AI
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    May 26, 2026
    Archived
    May 26, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗