@omarsar0: Great overview of always-on agents. (bookmark it) It's a new 130+ pages survey on always-on agents. Simply put it, alwa…
Summary
A new 130+ page survey on always-on agents, which are systems whose future behavior depends on durable state built up across earlier interactions. It treats state as more than memory, scoring each state item on six axes across a lifecycle, and introduces the Always-On Evaluation Protocol (AOEP-v0) to govern state mutation and recovery.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 07/06/26, 04:00 AM
Great overview of always-on agents.
(bookmark it)
It’s a new 130+ pages survey on always-on agents.
Simply put it, always-on agents are systems whose future behavior depends on durable state built up across earlier interactions. It treats that state as more than memory. Task ledgers, permissions, credentials, commitments, provenance, triggers, and externally committed effects all count.
The survey scores each state item on six axes, authority, scope, mutability, provenance, recoverability, and actionability, across a lifecycle that runs from write and retrieve through forget, audit, and rollback.
Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.30306
Learn to build effective AI agents in our academy: https://academy.dair.ai
Always-OnAgents:A Survey of Persistent Memory, State, and Governance in LLMAgents
Source: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.30306 View PDF
Abstract:Always-on agents are systems whose future behavior depends on durable state accumulated across earlier interactions. We treat them as persistent-state systems: the operative system includes retrievable memories, but also task ledgers, permissions, credentials, commitments, provenance and audit records, shared state, trigger conditions, and externally committed effects linked to those records. The survey reads the literature through six diagnostic axes for each state item, authority, scope, mutability, provenance, recoverability, and actionability, and through a lifecycle in which state is written, validated, organized, retrieved, acted upon, updated, forgotten, audited, and sometimes rolled back. Across a 435-work coded corpus, treated as a scoped map rather than an exhaustive census, the literature concentrates more heavily on accumulating and retrieving state than on governing, recovering, or relinquishing it. We therefore introduce the Always-On Evaluation Protocol (AOEP-v0), a pilot evaluation contract that makes these governance requirements concrete by scoring state mutation and recovery obligations rather than answer quality alone. The resulting agenda connects always-on agents to databases, distributed systems, formal methods, capability security, and machine unlearning.
Submission history
From: Tianyu Ding [view email] **[v1]**Mon, 29 Jun 2026 13:47:42 UTC (1,588 KB)
Similar Articles
does the "always on" agent need to be literally always on?
Discusses the architectural design of always-on AI agents, proposing that they need not be literally always on; instead, they could be made more ephemeral using serverless compute and state management to save costs.
@omarsar0: How to effectively run autonomous long-running coding agents? This is one of the most exciting discussions on agents I'…
A recorded discussion about effectively running autonomous long-running coding agents, including insights on goal setting, model selection, and best practices, made freely available.
@omarsar0: Great tips. In practice, this is how it roughly looks to run agents autonomously for hours or days. /goal or /loop to k…
A thread sharing practical tips for running AI agents autonomously for extended periods, focusing on the Opus model with advice on permissions, dynamic workflows, and verification.
@svpino: End-to-end example of a long-running AI agent that pauses, resumes, and never loses context. It simulates the onboardin…
This article provides an end-to-end example of a durable AI agent using Google's Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform. It covers patterns for state machines, event-driven agents, and multi-agent delegation for long-running tasks like employee onboarding.
@omarsar0: As we target more complex use of coding agents (e.g., dynamic workflows and /goals) on long-horizon tasks, you will sta…
Discusses challenges with coding agents in complex long-horizon tasks, highlighting bizarre user experience issues and inefficient agent interactions, and advocates for more control over the agent harness.