SafeAgentBench: A Benchmark for Safe Task Planning of Embodied LLM Agents
Open accessAbstract
With the integration of large language models (LLMs), embodied agents have strong capabilities to understand and plan complicated natural language instructions. However, a foreseeable issue is that those embodied agents can also flawlessly execute some hazardous tasks, potentially causing damages in the real world. Existing benchmarks predominantly overlook critical safety risks, focusing solely on planning performance, while a few evaluate LLMs' safety awareness only on non-interactive image-text data. To address this gap, we present SafeAgentBench -- the first comprehensive benchmark for safety-aware task planning of embodied LLM agents in interactive simulation environments, covering both explicit and implicit hazards. SafeAgentBench includes: (1) an executable, diverse, and high-quality dataset of 750 tasks, rigorously curated to cover 10 potential hazards and 3 task types; (2) SafeAgentEnv, a universal embodied environment with a low-level controller, supporting multi-agent execution with 17 high-level actions for 9 state-of-the-art baselines; and (3) reliable evaluation methods from both execution and semantic perspectives. Experimental results show that, although agents based on different design frameworks exhibit substantial differences in task success rates, their overall safety awareness remains weak. The most safety-conscious baseline achieves only a 10% rejection rate for detailed hazardous tasks. Moreover, simply replacing the LLM driving the agent does not lead to notable improvements in safety awareness. Dataset and codes are available in https://github.com/shengyin1224/SafeAgentBench and https://huggingface.co/datasets/safeagentbench/SafeAgentBench.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
SafeAgentBench assesses the ability of embodied agents to avoid hazards like fire and electrical shocks.
“SafeAgentBench [49] assesses the ability of embodied agents to avoid hazards like fire and electrical shocks”
From AgentSpec: Customizable Runtime Enforcement for Safe and Reliable LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as [49]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 41
- Josh Achiam, Steven Adler, Sandhini Agarwal, Lama Ahmad, Ilge Akkaya, Florencia Leoni Aleman, Diogo Almeida, Janko Altenschmidt, Sam Altman, Shyamal Anadkat, et al. Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774, 2023. · arXiv
- Shuang Ao, Flora D Salim, and Simon Khan. Emac+: Embodied multimodal agent for collaborative planning with vlm+ llm. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.19905, 2025. · arXiv
- Michele Brienza, Francesco Argenziano, Vincenzo Suriani, Domenico D Bloisi, and Daniele Nardi. Multi-agent planning using visual language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.05478, 2024. · arXiv
- Devendra Singh Chaplot, Dhiraj Prakashchand Gandhi, Abhinav Gupta, and Russ R Salakhutdinov. Object goal navigation using goal-oriented semantic exploration. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33:4247-4258, 2020.
- Liang Chen, Yichi Zhang, Shuhuai Ren, Haozhe Zhao, Zefan Cai, Yuchi Wang, Peiyi Wang, Tianyu Liu, and Baobao Chang. Towards end-to-end embodied decision making via multi-modal large language model: Explorations with gpt4-vision and beyond. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.02071, 2023. · arXiv
- Jae-Woo Choi, Youngwoo Yoon, Hyobin Ong, Jaehong Kim, and Minsu Jang. Lota-bench: Bench- marking language-oriented task planners for embodied agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.08178, 2024. · arXiv
- Gheorghe Comanici, Eric Bieber, Mike Schaekermann, Ice Pasupat, Noveen Sachdeva, Inderjit Dhillon, Marcel Blistein, Ori Ram, Dan Zhang, Evan Rosen, et al. Gemini 2.5: Pushing the frontier with advanced reasoning, multimodality, long context, and next generation agentic capabilities. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.06261, 2025. · arXiv
- Abhimanyu Dubey, Abhinav Jauhri, Abhinav Pandey, Abhishek Kadian, Ahmad Al-Dahle, Aiesha Letman, Akhil Mathur, Alan Schelten, Amy Yang, Angela Fan, et al. The llama 3 herd of models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.21783, 2024. · arXiv
- Zhaoye Fei, Li Ji, Siyin Wang, Junhao Shi, Jingjing Gong, and Xipeng Qiu. Unleashing embodied task planning ability in llms via reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.23127, 2025. · arXiv
- Chuang Gan, Siyuan Zhou, Jeremy Schwartz, Seth Alter, Abhishek Bhandwaldar, Dan Gutfreund, Daniel LK Yamins, James J DiCarlo, Josh McDermott, Antonio Torralba, et al. The threedworld transport challenge: A visually guided task-and-motion planning benchmark for physically realistic embodied ai. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.14025, 2021. · arXiv
- Lars Peter Hansen. Generalized method of moments estimation. Macroeconometrics and time series analysis, pp. 105-118, 2010.
- Jiang Hua, Liangcai Zeng, Gongfa Li, and Zhaojie Ju. Learning for a robot: Deep reinforcement learning, imitation learning, transfer learning. Sensors, 21(4):1278, 2021.
- Yuting Huang, Leilei Ding, Zhipeng Tang, Tianfu Wang, Xinrui Lin, Wuyang Zhang, Mingxiao Ma, and Yanyong Zhang. A framework for benchmarking and aligning task-planning safety in llm-based embodied agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.14650, 2025. · arXiv
- Julian Ibarz, Jie Tan, Chelsea Finn, Mrinal Kalakrishnan, Peter Pastor, and Sergey Levine. How to train your robot with deep reinforcement learning: lessons we have learned. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 40(4-5):698-721, 2021.
- Eric Kolve, Roozbeh Mottaghi, Winson Han, Eli VanderBilt, Luca Weihs, Alvaro Herrasti, Matt Deitke, Kiana Ehsani, Daniel Gordon, Yuke Zhu, et al. Ai2-thor: An interactive 3d environment for visual ai. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.05474, 2017. · arXiv
- Chengshu Li, Ruohan Zhang, Josiah Wong, Cem Gokmen, Sanjana Srivastava, Roberto Martín- Martín, Chen Wang, Gabrael Levine, Michael Lingelbach, Jiankai Sun, et al. Behavior-1k: A benchmark for embodied ai with 1,000 everyday activities and realistic simulation. In Conference on Robot Learning, pp. 80-93. PMLR, 2023.
- Xinran Li, Chenjia Bai, Zijian Li, Jiakun Zheng, Ting Xiao, and Jun Zhang. Learn as individu- als, evolve as a team: Multi-agent llms adaptation in embodied environments. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.07232, 2025. · arXiv
- Aixin Liu, Bei Feng, Bin Wang, Bingxuan Wang, Bo Liu, Chenggang Zhao, Chengqi Dengr, Chong Ruan, Damai Dai, Daya Guo, et al. Deepseek-v2: A strong, economical, and efficient mixture-of- experts language model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.04434, 2024a. · arXiv
- Shuyuan Liu, Jiawei Chen, Shouwei Ruan, Hang Su, and Zhaoxia Yin. Exploring the robustness of decision-level through adversarial attacks on llm-based embodied models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.19802, 2024b. · arXiv
- Xiaoya Lu, Zeren Chen, Xuhao Hu, Yijin Zhou, Weichen Zhang, Dongrui Liu, Lu Sheng, and Jing Shao. Is-bench: Evaluating interactive safety of vlm-driven embodied agents in daily household tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.16402, 2025. · arXiv
- James F Mullen Jr, Prasoon Goyal, Robinson Piramuthu, Michael Johnston, Dinesh Manocha, and Reza Ghanadan. " don't forget to put the milk back!" dataset for enabling embodied agents to detect anomalous situations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.08827, 2024. · arXiv
- Arvind Neelakantan, Tao Xu, Raul Puri, Alec Radford, Jesse Michael Han, Jerry Tworek, Qiming Yuan, Nikolas Tezak, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, et al. Text and code embeddings by contrastive pre-training. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.10005, 2022. · arXiv
- Xianghe Pang, Shuo Tang, Rui Ye, Yuxin Xiong, Bolun Zhang, Yanfeng Wang, and Siheng Chen. Self-alignment of large language models via monopolylogue-based social scene simulation. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024.
- Xavier Puig, Tianmin Shu, Shuang Li, Zilin Wang, Yuan-Hong Liao, Joshua B Tenenbaum, Sanja Fidler, and Antonio Torralba. Watch-and-help: A challenge for social perception and human-ai collaboration. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.09890, 2020. · arXiv
- Mohit Shridhar, Jesse Thomason, Daniel Gordon, Yonatan Bisk, Winson Han, Roozbeh Mottaghi, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Dieter Fox. Alfred: A benchmark for interpreting grounded instructions for everyday tasks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 10740-10749, 2020a.
- Mohit Shridhar, Xingdi Yuan, Marc-Alexandre Côté, Yonatan Bisk, Adam Trischler, and Matthew Hausknecht. Alfworld: Aligning text and embodied environments for interactive learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.03768, 2020b. · arXiv
- Ishika Singh, Valts Blukis, Arsalan Mousavian, Ankit Goyal, Danfei Xu, Jonathan Tremblay, Dieter Fox, Jesse Thomason, and Animesh Garg. Progprompt: Generating situated robot task plans using large language models. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 11523-11530. IEEE, 2023.
- Chan Hee Song, Jiaman Wu, Clayton Washington, Brian M Sadler, Wei-Lun Chao, and Yu Su. Llm-planner: Few-shot grounded planning for embodied agents with large language models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 2998-3009, 2023.
- Andrew Szot, Alexander Clegg, Eric Undersander, Erik Wijmans, Yili Zhao, John Turner, Noah Maestre, Mustafa Mukadam, Devendra Singh Chaplot, Oleksandr Maksymets, et al. Habitat 2.0: Training home assistants to rearrange their habitat. Advances in neural information processing systems, 34:251-266, 2021.
- Boxin Wang, Weixin Chen, Hengzhi Pei, Chulin Xie, Mintong Kang, Chenhui Zhang, Chejian Xu, Zidi Xiong, Ritik Dutta, Rylan Schaeffer, et al. Decodingtrust: A comprehensive assessment of trustworthiness in gpt models. In NeurIPS, 2023.
- Zixuan Wang, Bo Yu, Junzhe Zhao, Wenhao Sun, Sai Hou, Shuai Liang, Xing Hu, Yinhe Han, and Yiming Gan. Karma: Augmenting embodied ai agents with long-and-short term memory systems. In 2025 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 1-8. IEEE, 2025.
- Yike Wu, Jiatao Zhang, Nan Hu, LanLing Tang, Guilin Qi, Jun Shao, Jie Ren, and Wei Song. Mldt: Multi-level decomposition for complex long-horizon robotic task planning with open-source large language model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.18760, 2024. · arXiv
- An Yang, Baosong Yang, Binyuan Hui, Bo Zheng, Bowen Yu, Chang Zhou, Chengpeng Li, Chengyuan Li, Dayiheng Liu, Fei Huang, et al. Qwen2 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.10671, 2024. · arXiv
- Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.03629, 2022. · arXiv
- Jingwei Yi, Rui Ye, Qisi Chen, Bin Zhu, Siheng Chen, Defu Lian, Guangzhong Sun, Xing Xie, and Fangzhao Wu. On the vulnerability of safety alignment in open-access llms. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024, pp. 9236-9260, 2024.
- Tongxin Yuan, Zhiwei He, Lingzhong Dong, Yiming Wang, Ruijie Zhao, Tian Xia, Lizhen Xu, Binglin Zhou, Fangqi Li, Zhuosheng Zhang, et al. R-judge: Benchmarking safety risk awareness for llm agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.10019, 2024. · arXiv
- Hangtao Zhang, Chenyu Zhu, Xianlong Wang, Ziqi Zhou, Shengshan Hu, and Leo Yu Zhang. Badrobot: Jailbreaking llm-based embodied ai in the physical world. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.20242, 2024. · arXiv
- Hongxin Zhang, Weihua Du, Jiaming Shan, Qinhong Zhou, Yilun Du, Joshua B Tenenbaum, Tianmin Shu, and Chuang Gan. Building cooperative embodied agents modularly with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.02485, 2023. · arXiv
- Qinhong Zhou, Sunli Chen, Yisong Wang, Haozhe Xu, Weihua Du, Hongxin Zhang, Yilun Du, Joshua B Tenenbaum, and Chuang Gan. Hazard challenge: Embodied decision making in dynami- cally changing environments. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.12975, 2024. · arXiv
- Zihao Zhu, Bingzhe Wu, Zhengyou Zhang, Lei Han, Qingshan Liu, and Baoyuan Wu. Earbench: Towards evaluating physical risk awareness for task planning of foundation model-based embodied ai agents. arXiv preprint, 2024a.
- Zihao Zhu, Bingzhe Wu, Zhengyou Zhang, and Baoyuan Wu. Riskawarebench: Towards evaluating physical risk awareness for high-level planning of llm-based embodied agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.04449, 2024b. Here are the action rules: 1. The object to be picked must be found first. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evaluation and Benchmarking of LLM Agents: A Survey
Mohammadi, M., Li, Y., Lo, J., & Yip, W. (2025) · Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining V.2 · doi:10.1145/3711896.3736570 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
The Emerged Security and Privacy of LLM Agent: A Survey with Case Studies
He, F., Zhu, T., Ye, D., Liu, B., Zhou, W., & Yu, P. S. (2026) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3773080 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Agentic AI Security: Threats, Defenses, Evaluation, and Open Challenges
Chhabra, A., Datta, S., Nahin, S. K., & Mohapatra, P. (2026) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2026.3675554 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
AgentSpec: Customizable Runtime Enforcement for Safe and Reliable LLM Agents
Wang, H., Poskitt, C. M., & Sun, J. (2026) · Proceedings of the 2026 IEEE/ACM 48th International Conference on Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3744916.3764546 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
OpenAgentSafety: A Comprehensive Framework for Evaluating Real-World AI Agent Safety
Vijayvargiya, S., Soni, A. B., Zhou, X., Wang, Z. Z., Dziri, N., Neubig, G., & Sap, M. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.06134
“…Diverse intents User interaction SALAD-Bench [17] ✗ ✗ h4rm3l [7] ✗ ✗ SafeBench [38] ✗ ✗ Agent-SafetyBench [43] ✗ ✗ SG-Bench [20] ✗ ✗ SafeAgentBench [37] ✗ ✗ ChemSafetyBench [44] ✗ ✗ LM-Emulated Sandbox [26] ✗ ✗ AdvWeb [35] ✓ ✗ Refusal-Trained LLMs [13] ✓ ✗ RedCode [9] ✓ ✗ From Interaction to…”
Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents
Zhang, Z., Cui, S., Lu, Y., Zhou, J., Yang, J., Wang, H., & Huang, M. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.14470 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
ST-WebAgentBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Safety and Trustworthiness in Web Agents
Levy, I., Wiesel, B., Marreed, S., Oved, A., Yaeli, A., Mashkif, N., & Shlomov, S. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.06703 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Yin, S., Pang, X., Ding, Y., Chen, M., Bi, Y., Xiong, Y., Huang, W., Xiang, Z., Shao, J., & Chen, S.
- Affiliations
- Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
- Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CN)
- University of Georgia (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2412.13178
- OpenAlex
- W4405562840
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
- Keywords
- task planning, safety awareness, benchmark, interactive simulation environment, large language models, safety assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review