top | item 46683995

(no title)

amadeuswoo | 1 month ago

Interesting architecture. Im curious about the workflow when an agent hits a denied action, does it get a structured rejection it can reason about and try an alternative, or does it just fail? Wondering how the feedback loop works between safety kernel and the LLM's planning

discuss

order

yaront111|1 month ago

Great question. This is actually a core design principle of the Cordum Agent Protocol (CAP).

It’s definitely a *structured rejection*, not a silent fail. Since the LLM needs to "know" it was blocked to adjust its plan, the kernel returns a standard error payload (e.g., `PolicyViolationError`) with context.

The flow looks like this: 1. *Agent:* Sends intent "Delete production DB". 2. *Kernel:* Checks policy -> DENY. 3. *Kernel:* Returns a structured result: `{ "status": "blocked", "reason": "destructive_action_limit", "message": "Deletion requires human approval" }`. 4. *Agent (LLM):* Receives this as an observation. 5. *Agent (Re-planning):* "Oh, I can't delete it. I will generate a slack message to the admin asking for approval instead."

This feedback loop turns safety from a "blocker" into a constraint that the agent can reason around, which is critical for autonomous recovery.