ATLAS: Discovering Agent Strategies through LLM-Guided Abstraction and Automata Learning

Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents are increasingly used for complex tasks such as software testing and cybersecurity assessment. While these agents demonstrate impressive capabilities, their behavior is difficult to understand, explain, and analyze. Existing evaluations focus mainly on task success and execution traces, offering limited insight into the strategies employed by the agent. We present ATLAS (Automata Learning for Agent Trajectory Analysis and Strategy Discovery), an approach for recovering interpretable behavioral models from agent trajectories. ATLAS combines trace abstraction with automata learning to infer finite-state models that capture observed agent-environment interaction strategies. These models provide human-interpretable insights and support automated analyses of recurring behaviors, decision points, successful task-completion paths, and failure loops. As a proof of concept, we apply ATLAS to trajectories generated by an LLM-based penetration-testing agent. The resulting models expose high-level behavioral strategies for exploiting vulnerable machines that are difficult to identify from raw execution traces alone. We discuss how learned behavioral models can support explainability, model-guided exploration, auditing, and analysis of agentic systems. We further demonstrate symbolic model-based knowledge transfer from powerful frontier models to compact language models. In addition, we show how model transformations can derive concise explanations of agent behavior in a penetration-testing case study comprising 12 vulnerable machines. ATLAS highlights a new opportunity for model-driven engineering: transforming agent trajectories into explicit behavioral models that enable systematic understanding and analysis of otherwise opaque AI agents.

Baselines Before Architecture: Evaluating Coding Agents for Autonomous Penetration Testing

Recent autonomous penetration testing papers report high benchmark scores while adding multi-component security harnesses around frontier LLMs. Because these systems often change both architecture and backbone model, it is difficult to tell how much performance comes from the harness rather than from the underlying model. This paper presents a controlled study on the 104-task XBOW benchmark using default coding CLI agents as plain-agent baselines. We first run Codex, OpenCode, and Pi with the same GPT-5 model, budget, target interface, and scoring rule. This phase identifies the strongest same-model baseline and tests whether security-specific prompt variants improve its observed score. We then compare the default Codex scaffold with published MAPTA and PentestGPT V2 results under the closest available model matches. Finally, we repeat the plain-agent experiment with GPT-5.2 and GPT-5.5 to measure model scaling inside the same scaffold. The results show a mixed but practical picture. Specialised harnesses can add measurable benchmark lift and may improve cost efficiency, but plain coding agents already solve a large share of the benchmark; repeated plain-agent runs can match or exceed some published architecture scores in union coverage, and newer models substantially improve the same scaffold. Future evaluations should report model-matched plain-agent baselines before attributing benchmark gains to architecture design alone.