Yuetong Liu, Zhehao Zhou, Yitong Zhang, Haorui Chen, Jia Li
Large language model (LLM) agents typically append raw tool outputs to their context. Over multi-step interactions, long and noisy observations incur substantial context overhead and dilute the agent's attention to task-relevant information. Existing token pruning and summarization methods remain constrained by discrete text representations, limiting the achievable compression ratios. In this work, we challenge the prevailing assumption that agents must consume tool observations as explicit text tokens. To this end, we propose Coca-Cola, a continuous latent context compression model for LLM agents. Coca-Cola compresses tool observations into latent tokens and embeds them into the input embedding space of the agent. We further introduce Action-Preserving Training, which aligns the agent's next-action distributions under full and compressed observations. This trains the compression model to learn action-sufficient latent tokens that retain decision-critical information. Experiments with web-search agents on four QA benchmarks and two model families show that Coca-Cola reduces the agent's token consumption by 70.01%-89.24% and end-to-end runtime by 24.45%-55.97%, while consistently improving task performance. These results suggest that Coca-Cola offers a promising approach for context compression in agents. Our code is available at https://github.com/THU-Agent/Coca-cola.
Guard models are increasingly used to safeguard LLM-based agents, primarily by identifying actions that agents are forbidden to perform. However, identifying forbidden actions alone is insufficient to ensure agent safety. In this paper, we argue that agent safety also depends on identifying required yet unperformed safety-critical actions, which we call obligations. Our preliminary study on a popular benchmark for evaluating safety shows that 56.92% of GLM-5.3 trajectories contain unfulfilled obligations, compared with only 30.00% containing forbidden actions. This finding reveals unfulfilled obligations as a major and previously overlooked source of safety risk. However, to our knowledge, no existing benchmark evaluates whether guard models can identify these obligations. To close this gap, we introduce ObligationBench, the first benchmark for evaluating the capability of obligation identification, comprising 240 expert-validated trajectories covering issue resolution, feature development, and terminal operations. Our evaluation of 14 representative models reveals substantial limitations: the highest recall and exact-match rate are only 48.97% and 10.00%, respectively. To address these limitations, we develop ObligationGuard using 40,000 synthetic training examples. ObligationGuard achieves 57.52% recall and an exact-match rate of 21.67%, surpassing all evaluated models on both metrics. We call on the community to incorporate obligation identification into the design and evaluation of future guard models to improve agent safety.