Skip to content
Preprint

Resume Means Resume: A Machine-Checked Conformance Contract for Checkpoint, Interrupt, and Resume Semantics in Workflow Persistence Layers

Aug 2026 · 3 citations · 97 references
Computer Science

Abstract

A framework that persists execution state so a run can be interrupted, survive a crash, and continue must decide what a resume means for effects that already happened. Five widely deployed agent workflow frameworks answer differently, none exposes a machine-checkable contract, and measured behavior violates even the fragments they state. The RESUME CONTRACT states six properties over the persistence API (prefix continuation, effect exactly-once, fork determinism, checkpoint validity, consume-once, recovery determinism), plus fork-intent and liveness obligations. A TLA+ model checks a reference semantics exhaustively, unchanged at scaled bounds (7.4 million states), and the reference conjunction is additionally TLAPS-proved unbounded (196 obligations); a 39-cell fault matrix and two companion modules yield the separating models independence requires. A deterministic, LLM-free harness measures them at pinned releases. LangGraph 1.2.9 durably records a second resume value and never consults it, persists schema-invalid state silently, and re-executes durably recorded work after a real SIGKILL: exactly-once across interrupts, at-least-once across crashes, on one API. CrewAI 1.15.2 re-executes completed effect-bearing methods against its written claim; pydantic-graph 1.x cannot resume after a mid-node crash; no two probed frameworks share a conformance profile. Consume-once holds sequentially and fails under concurrent delivery: k processes resuming one parked interrupt fire the gated effect k times, saturation 1.0 in 36 of 40 cells, and the failure crosses hosts. REMIT, a reference sequencer whose Verus-verified recovery core is line-identical to the shipped executable, repairs the fork and validity cells. The cross-process cell is repaired at the read path: an opt-in gate claims consumption in the shared store, serving one racer and refusing the rest before any node executes.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Aug 2026

Safe to Resume? Breaking Execution Continuity of Agent Execution via Rollback

This paper presents the first systematic security study of checkpoint and rollback in existing agent systems, and develops a multi-agent analysis pipeline that reconstructs execution semantics, identifies violations of the five failure conditions, and validates them through actual rollback.

Guan-Long Wu, Da-Hui Li, Ke Jiang et al. · 2 citations
Book Open access Oct 2026

Formal Runtime Verification for Tool-Using LLM Agents: An Offline Same-Benchmark Study on AgentDojo and STAC

Guardrails for tool-using LLM agents are usually application-specific rules, which makes multi-step, data-dependent safety policies hard to specify, audit and reuse. As a declarative alternative, we evaluate metric first-order temporal logic (MFOTL), replaying the recorded trajectories that AgentDojo, STAC and R-Judge...

Nikolaos Kekatos, Stylianos Basagiannis, Marinelio Chintri et al. · 2 citations
Preprint Sep 2026

Runtime-Independent Persistent Agents: Preserving Identity, Memory, and Code Across Models, Harnesses, and Servers

A runtime-independent architecture that separates a continuity-bearing substrate $P_t=(I_t,M_t,B_t)$ from replaceable execution and interaction bindings is presented, which support mechanical continuity for the tested deployments and bounded workflows.

Zhe Zhao, Roy Zhao Independent Researcher, P. G. A. S. O. C. ScienceEngineering et al. · 2 citations · ⚡1
Book Open access Sep 2026

Lion: Modular Verification of Async Runtime Liveness

This work introduces an append-only logical event log that abstracts implementation details and enables a Kamp-style translation of Linear Temporal Logic into First-Order Logic, which enables deductive program verifiers to reason about progress via monotonic timestamps without needing native temporal logic support.

Ti Zhou, Zi-Hao Zhang, Omar Chowdhury et al. · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Where Does Exactly-Once Live? Model, Harness, and Tool-Contract Effects on Duplicate Side Effects in LLM Agents

LIMBO, a deterministic sandbox of six services with realistic contracts and twelve fault modes injected at the service boundary and twelve fault modes injected at the service boundary, is introduced, proving that no verification-only policy is exactly-once under late commits without a bound on in-flight time.

Jia-Peng Li · 2 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.