Poisoned into Action: Context Attacks on Typed Decision Workflows

Abstract

Typed decision interfaces restrict models to predefined actions, yet schema-valid choices can still trigger policy-violating state changes. Evaluating context poisoning thus requires connecting model decisions to execution outcomes while accounting for legitimate automation retained by defenses. We introduce an execution-aware protocol tracing poisoned evidence through retrieval, model choice, automated action, and persisted state. We evaluate it with 1,659 fresh calls to Jev-1.13.0 across 20 development tasks in two synthetic workflows, using three repetitions per condition. Under natural retrieval, a standalone payload reaches all 60 trials and produces five security-violating executions, while a carrier-payload pair exposes the payload in 57 trials and produces one violation. An initial source-exclusion gate blocks the pair's observed violation but also withholds ten otherwise correct attacked decisions and sixteen correct clean decisions. Correcting its empty-scope behavior restores twelve clean decisions without additional model calls. Factorial controls show that adding correct evidence reduces wrong executions from 119/120 to 55/120 in the semantic arm and from 60/120 to zero in the neutral arm, suggesting that much of the improvement reflects general evidence value rather than attack-specific protection. Three prespecified contrasts are not statistically supported after Holm correction, so the findings remain exploratory. The protocol provides an auditable framework for studying which poisoning-induced errors reach execution and how much correct automation defenses preserve. Code is available at https://github.com/WuXixiong/jev-poisoning-bench.