AI, RAG & ML · Audit

LLM Agent Tools Audit

Audit agentic AI flows that let an LLM choose tools, call functions, mutate data, browse/search, run code, or orchestrate multi-step work. Keep only reachable issues that affect correctness, safety, permissions, cost, observability, or eval coverage.

MCP library 1.6.1 · Instruction library 1.6.1 · English technical instructions

← Back to search

Use this workflow

Connect Vibe Coding Library to a coding agent that supports MCP over Streamable HTTP. Choose Other / MCP agent for a neutral prompt, or a ready-made Codex or Claude Code invocation. Add your task details below.

Operation

Inspect the selected behavior and report evidence-backed defects; do not change product code.

Goal

Audit agentic AI flows that let an LLM choose tools, call functions, mutate data, browse/search, run code, or orchestrate multi-step work. Keep only reachable issues that affect correctness, safety, permissions, cost, observability, or eval coverage.

Inspect

Agent loops, tool/function schemas, tool routers, system/developer prompts, structured outputs, retry/repair logic, approval gates, sandboxing, permission checks, tenancy filters, external API calls, mutation tools, background jobs, memory/state, streaming UI, traces/logs, evals, fixtures, docs, and generated AI maps when present.

Issue classes

  • Tool contract drift: vague schemas, ambiguous required fields, missing enum constraints, missing repeat-safety for effectful calls, weak output validation, or callers that assume fields the tool does not guarantee.
  • Permission and safety gaps: tools bypass tenant/user/plan checks, mutation tools bypass the established authorization policy or require fresh approval for a consequential action without obtaining it, prompt-injected tool arguments can alter protected state, or external browsing/search leaks private context.
  • Agent loop control: unbounded iterations, retry storms, recursive tool calls, no timeout/cancel path, duplicate side effects, or incomplete recovery after partial tool failure.
  • Grounding and memory: stale or unsafe memory, user/project context mixed across sessions, hidden context overriding explicit user intent, and unsupported claims after tool failure.
  • UI/UX contract: streaming hides tool status, destructive operations lack review, errors are opaque, or user cannot distinguish draft/reviewed/applied results.
  • Cost and operations: missing rate limits, no per-run budget, high-cost tools on hot paths, weak traceability, and absent diagnostics for low-confidence/failed tool calls.
  • Existing user authorization can cover a bounded routine mutation; do not demand a new confirmation for every write solely because it changes state.
  • Evaluation: missing tool-choice evals, mutation safety fixtures, adversarial prompt-injection cases, tenant isolation tests, and golden traces for critical workflows.

Trace and hand off

Choose an allowed task and a closely related denied/out-of-scope task. Trace model-visible tool metadata → selected name/arguments → runtime authorization → actual effect/result → continuation or terminal state. Inspect persisted effects and attempts independently of the narration. Pass the failing decision or execution boundary, principal, request identity and expected effect count to Improve LLM Agent Tools. Keep protocol/transport defects with the MCP workflow and durable replay defects with Harness when those layers own the failure.

Workflow ID: llm-agent-tools-audit · View the versioned source · Shared workflow and authority rules