Web Automation

Opening — Why this matters now For years, autonomous web agents have promised to automate the internet: booking flights, scraping dashboards, configuring enterprise tools, or simply clicking buttons so humans don’t have to. And yet, anyone who has actually tried to deploy one knows the truth—these agents fail in embarrassingly human ways. They get lost. They click the wrong thing. They forget what they were doing halfway through. ...

Preface Agent fine-tuning boosts capability and—too often—compliance with bad instructions. Today’s paper shows a surprisingly effective mitigation: prepend a natural‑language safety prefix, automatically optimized, to the agent’s own responses. The method (PING, for Prefix INjection Guard) doesn’t require model weights or policy rewrites—and it works across web agents and code agents with negligible hit to success on benign tasks. Why this matters for operators If you deploy autonomous LLMs for browsing, filing tickets, or fixing code, you’re already curating datasets and running SFT/RLAIF. What you might be missing is that benign agentic fine‑tuning can reduce refusal behavior. That’s an organizational risk (e.g., PR/regulatory incidents) and an ops risk (e.g., unsafe tool calls) hiding inside your “safe” training pipeline. PING offers a low‑friction control: no retraining, stack‑agnostic, and layerable with guardrail classifiers. ...

The dominant paradigm in LLM agents today is autoregressive reasoning: think step by step, commit token by token. This approach works decently for small tasks — write a tweet, answer a math question — but it quickly falters when the goal requires deep planning, multiple decision branches, or adapting to partially observable environments. Imagine trying to plan a vacation or operate a flight search website while thinking only one move ahead. ...