about
Delegated Agent Authorization Constrained to Semantic Task-to-Scope Matching (arxiv.org)
1 point by mooreds 230 days ago | hide | past | pdf | discuss on HN

In plain words: A permission server reads an agent's assigned task and hands out only the access rights that task needs, instead of the usual blanket permissions. A new test set of fitting and unfitting requests shows this matching works but slips as tasks need more rights.

Abstract · Delegated Authorization for Agents Constrained to Semantic Task-to-Scope Matching

Authorizing Large Language Model driven agents to dynamically invoke tools and access protected resources introduces significant risks, since current methods for delegating authorization grant overly broad permissions and give access to tools allowing agents to operate beyond the intended task scope. We introduce and assess a delegated authorization model enabling authorization servers to semantically inspect access requests to protected resources, and issue access tokens constrained to the minimal set of scopes necessary for the agents' assigned tasks. Given the unavailability of datasets centered on delegated authorization flows, particularly including both semantically appropriate and inappropriate scope requests for a given task, we introduce ASTRA, a dataset and data generation pipeline for benchmarking semantic matching between tasks and scopes. Our experiments show both the potential and current limitations of model-based matching, particularly as the number of scopes needed for task completion increases. Our results highlight the need for further research into semantic matching techniques enabling intent-aware authorization for multi-agent and tool-augmented applications, including fine-grained control, such as Task-Based Access Control (TBAC).

Majed El Helou, Chiara Troiani, Benjamin Ryder, Jean Diaconu, Hervé Muyal, Marcelo Yannuzzi
arXiv:2510.26702 · cs.AI · submitted Oct 30, 2025
abstract · pdf · html · Paper page at https://outshift-open.github.io/ASTRA

add comment on HN
Also discussed: Jan 2026 (1 point, 0 comments)