[nl]

> The entire purpose of LLMs is to be non-static: they have no deterministic output and can't be validated the same way a non-LLM function can be. Adding another LLM layer is just adding another layer of swiss cheese and praying the holes don't line up. You have no way of predicting ahead of time whether or not they will.

This is exactly the point though. A LLM is great at finding work-around for static defenses. We need something that understands the intent and responds to that.

Static rules are insufficient

[waterTanuki]

Where are the examples of a system that had insufficient static guarantees that was made any better by an LLM judge?