CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1Multi-Agent Systems and NegotiationAccess Control and TrustAI-based Problem Solving and Planning

Agent Contracts: A Formal Framework for Resource-Bounded Autonomous AI Systems

Open access
Ye, Qing, Tan, Jing·2026·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2601.08815arXiv 2601.08815
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The Contract Net Protocol (1980) introduced coordination through contracts in multi-agent systems. Modern agent protocols standardize connectivity and interoperability; yet, none provide formal, resource governance-normative mechanisms to bound how much agents may consume or how long they may operate. We introduce Agent Contracts, a formal framework that extends the contract metaphor from task allocation to resource-bounded execution. An Agent Contract unifies input/output specifications, multi-dimensional resource constraints, temporal boundaries, and success criteria into a coherent governance mechanism with explicit lifecycle semantics. For multi-agent coordination, we establish conservation laws ensuring delegated budgets respect parent constraints, enabling hierarchical coordination through contract delegation. Empirical validation across four experiments demonstrates 90% token reduction with 525x lower variance in iterative workflows, zero conservation violations in multi-agent delegation, and measurable quality-resource tradeoffs through contract modes. Agent Contracts provide formal foundations for predictable, auditable, and resource-bounded autonomous AI deployment.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2601.08815

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Agent Contracts gives a formal multidimensional resource-contract framework with conservation across hierarchical, parallel, and recursive delegation; retrieval-conditioned topology selection proves a six-dimensional budget algebra for changing multi-agent topologies; and Token Budgets uses affine ownership to prevent clone, double-spend, and use-after-delegation failures.

    “Agent Contracts gives a formal multidimensional resource-contract framework with conservation across hierarchical, parallel, and recursive delegation; retrieval-conditioned topology selection proves a six-dimensional budget algebra for changing multi-agent topologies; and Token Budgets uses affine ownership to prevent clone, double-spend, and use-after-delegation failures [13, 27, 33].”

    From Authorization for Self-Modifying AI Agent Populations: Conserving Authority across Replacement, Forking, and Rollback (2026) · cites this paper as [33]

    Split into 3 atoms — 1 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. Amodei, D., Olah, C., Steinhardt, J., Christiano, P., Schulman, J., Mané, D.: Concrete problems in ai safety. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.06565 (2016) · arXiv
  2. Boella, G., van der Torre, L., Verhagen, H.: Introduction to normative mul- tiagent systems. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory 12(2-3), 71-79 (2006)
  3. Bolton, P., Dewatripont, M.: Contract Theory. MIT Press (2005)
  4. Buttazzo, G.C.: Hard Real-Time Computing Systems: Predictable Schedul- ing Algorithms and Applications. Springer Science & Business Media (2011)
  5. Cemri, M., et al.: Why do multi-agent llm systems fail? arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.13657 (2025) · arXiv
  6. Gartner: Gartner identifies the top 10 strategic technology trends for 2025. https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2024-10-21-gart ner-identifies-the-top-10-strategic-technology-trends-for-2025 (October 2024)
  7. Gartner: Gartner predicts over 40% of agentic ai projects will be canceled by end of 2027. https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2025- 06-25-gartner-predicts-over-40-percent-of-agentic-ai-projects-will-be- canceled-by-end-of-2027 (June 2025)
  8. Guerdan, L., Coston, A., Holstein, K., Wu, Z.S.: Validating llm-as-a-judge systems under rating indeterminacy. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) (2025)
  9. Hart, O.: Firms, Contracts, and Financial Structure. Oxford University Press (1995)
  10. Hong, S., Zheng, X., Chen, J., Cheng, Y., Wang, J., Zhang, C., Wang, Z., Yau, S.K.S., Lin, Z., Zhou, L., et al.: Metagpt: Meta programming for multi- agent collaborative framework. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.00352 (2023) · arXiv
  11. Hu, J., Dong, Y., Ao, S., Li, Z., Wang, B., Singh, L., Cheng, G., Ram- churn, S.D., Huang, X.: Position: Towards a responsible llm-empowered multi-agent systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.01714 (2025) · arXiv
  12. Jain, N., Han, K., Gu, A., Li, W.D., Yan, F., Zhang, T., Wang, S., Solar- Lezama, A., Sen, K., Stoica, I.: Livecodebench: Holistic and contamina- tion free evaluation of large language models for code. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07974 (2024) · arXiv
  13. Kwon, W., Li, Z., Zhuang, S., Sheng, Y., Zheng, L., Yu, C.H., Gonzalez, J.E., Zhang, H., Stoica, I.: Efficient memory management for large language model serving with pagedattention. Proceedings of the 29th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles pp. 611-626 (2023)
  14. Lee, B., et al.: Agentic ai frameworks: Architectures, protocols, and design challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.10146 (2025) · arXiv
  15. Li, Z., et al.: Self-resource allocation in multi-agent llm systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02051 (2025) · arXiv
  16. Liu, T., et al.: Budget-aware tool-use enables effective agent scaling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.17006 (2025) · arXiv
  17. Liu, Y., et al.: Budgetthinker: Empowering budget-aware llm reasoning with control tokens. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.17196 (2025) · arXiv
  18. Malone, T.W., Crowston, K.: The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Computing Surveys 26(1), 87-119 (1994)
  19. MIT Sloan Management Review, Boston Consulting Group: The emerging agentic enterprise: How leaders must navigate a new age of ai. https://sl oanreview.mit.edu/projects/the-emerging-agentic-enterprise-how-leaders- must-navigate-a-new-age-of-ai/ (2025), research report on agentic AI adoption in enterprises
  20. Park, J.S., O'Brien, J.C., Cai, C.J., Morris, M.R., Liang, P., Bernstein, M.S.: Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.03442 (2023) · arXiv
  21. Phelps, S., Ranson, R.: Of models and tin men: A behavioural economics study of principal-agent problems in ai alignment using large-language mod- els. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.11137 (2023) · arXiv
  22. Schick, T., Dwivedi-Yu, J., Dessì, R., Raileanu, R., Lomeli, M., Zettlemoyer, L., Cancedda, N., Scialom, T.: Toolformer: Language models can teach themselves to use tools. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.04761 (2023) · arXiv
  23. Shoham, Y., Leyton-Brown, K.: Multiagent Systems: Algorithmic, Game- Theoretic, and Logical Foundations. Cambridge University Press (2008)
  24. Simon, H.A.: A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 69(1), 99-118 (1955)
  25. Simon, H.A.: Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psycho- logical Review 63(2), 129-138 (1956)
  26. Smith, R.G.: The contract net protocol: High-level communication and control in a distributed problem solver. IEEE Transactions on Computers 29(12), 1104-1113 (1980)
  27. Snell, C., et al.: Reasoning in token economies: Budget-aware evaluation of llm reasoning strategies. In: Proceedings of EMNLP (2024)
  28. Tran, K.T., Dao, D., Nguyen, M.D., Pham, Q.V., O'Sullivan, B., Nguyen, H.D.: Multi-agent collaboration mechanisms: A survey of llms. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.06322 (2025) · arXiv
  29. Wang, C., et al.: Beyond self-talk: A communication-centric survey of llm- based multi-agent systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.14321 (2025) · arXiv
  30. Wang, Y., et al.: Selfbudgeter: Adaptive token allocation for efficient llm reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.11274 (2025) · arXiv
  31. Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q., Zhou, D.: Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35, 24824-24837 (2022)
  32. Wooldridge, M.: An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems. John Wiley & Sons (2009)
  33. Wu, Q., Bansal, G., Zhang, J., Wu, Y., Zhang, S., Zhu, E., Li, B., Jiang, L., Zhang, X., Wang, C.: Autogen: Enabling next-gen llm applications via multi-agent conversation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.08155 (2023) · arXiv
  34. Yao, S., Zhao, J., Yu, D., Du, N., Shafran, I., Narasimhan, K., Cao, Y.: React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.03629 (2023) · arXiv
  35. Ye, M., et al.: Getting in contract with large language models: An agency theory perspective on large language model alignment. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.07642 (2025) · arXiv
  36. Yu, G.I., Jeong, J.S., Kim, G.W., Kim, S., Chun, B.G.: Orca: A distributed serving system for transformer-based generative models. 16th USENIX Sym- posium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 22) pp. 521-538 (2022)
  37. Zhang, Y., et al.: Formalizing the safety, security, and functional properties of agentic ai systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.14133 (2025) · arXiv
  38. Zilberstein, S.: Optimizing decision quality with contract algorithms. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI). pp. 1576-1582. Montreal, Canada (1995)
  39. Zilberstein, S.: Using anytime algorithms in intelligent systems. AI Maga- zine 17(3), 73-83 (1996)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ye, Q., & Tan, J.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2601.08815
arXiv
2601.08815
OpenAlex
W7124157931
Cited by
0
References
2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Access Control and Trust
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Keywords
multi-agent coordination, contract net protocol, resource constraints, task allocation, token efficiency

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