Guard Polyglot: test whether your agent guard changes its verdict by language
A CLI that translates your guard test set and reports verdict flips by language. Teams shipping agents outside English pay.
Competitive · Guards flip verdicts across languages
Written for: Solo builder
Next step
This week, rebuild the paper's setup against two open guard models in a single Python CLI, publish the flip table on GitHub, and post it to r/LocalLLaMA and the AI-safety Discords where guard authors hang out.
Why now
Agent guards are being deployed in front of tool calls in every market, and attackers can switch language for free. The paper gives a reproducible method but no tool. Teams selling into Germany, Brazil or India have no quick way to show their guard holds up.
What became possible
LinguaGuardBench translated only the user instruction in 1,220 labelled agent steps and found that step-level guards give different safe/unsafe verdicts depending on the request's language. Guards were trained and tested only in English.
Two ways in
- Guard Polyglot CLI
Point it at a guard endpoint and a set of labelled steps. It machine-translates them into 10 languages, reruns the guard and outputs a flip table plus the worst examples.
- Customer
- Startups shipping agents with guard models to non-English users
- Model
- Open-source CLI; $199 one-off for a signed report with expanded languages
- Polyglot CI check
A GitHub Action that fails the build when the guard's cross-language flip rate rises above a threshold.
- Customer
- Agent platform teams running guards in CI
- Model
- Free for public repos, $39/month private
Competition
No product I found takes a team's own labelled agent-step test set, translates it, and reports where the guard's verdict flips against English along with the worst examples. Promptfoo and DeepTeam translate attack prompts and score each language, and MrGuard defines the consistency metric in research, but none treats flip rate as the main output for agent guards or controls translation quality.
Full competition notes (8 competitors)
No product I found takes a team's own labelled agent-step test set, translates it, and reports where the guard's verdict flips against English along with the worst examples. Promptfoo and DeepTeam translate attack prompts and score each language, and MrGuard defines the consistency metric in research, but none treats flip rate as the main output for agent guards or controls translation quality. A new entrant could win with a narrow, developer-friendly tool. It would run on real agent traces and tool calls, use back-translation or a judge to throw out bad translations so they don't count as guard failures, show flips per language and per category, and give a simple CI threshold. The main risk is that promptfoo adds a flip report as a small feature, and a standalone CLI may be hard to charge for. Revenue more likely comes from hosted history and drift tracking, stronger translation for languages with little training data, and compliance reports for teams in regulated markets outside English.
- promptfoo multilingual strategy
Open-source eval and red-team tool already used in CI. Its multilingual strategy translates test inputs into chosen languages (default Bengali, Swahili, Javanese) and reports metrics for each language. It doesn't report verdict flips against English or check translation quality, but it is the most likely to absorb this idea.
- DeepTeam Multilingual attack
Confident AI's open-source red-teaming library has a Multilingual attack that translates attacks into less-spoken languages to get past filters. It is attack-focused and doesn't compare verdicts on a labelled set.
- garak-multilingual (third-party garak plugin)
Community plugin that adds multilingual prompt-injection and jailbreak probes to NVIDIA's garak scanner. It is a probe library, not a tool for checking a guard's consistency.
- MrGuard (academic)
Paper with code that defines cross-lingual consistency as how often a guard's verdict agrees between English and other languages on the XSafety parallel set. This is almost exactly the flip-rate metric, but as research rather than a product.
- Benchmarking LLM Guardrails in Handling Multilingual Toxicity
Academic study that machine-translated guard test sets into 8 languages and measured Llama Guard and others per language. It is a one-off benchmark, not a tool.
- Mozilla.ai any-guardrail and multilingual evaluation
Open-source single interface for many guard models, used to compare English and Farsi guard behavior. It also warns that judges can make cross-language results look misleadingly consistent.
- Lakera PINT benchmark
Prompt-injection detector benchmark with about 1,300 non-English inputs. It is a fixed dataset, not a tool for translating your own test set.
- ML-Bench / ML-Guard
May 2026 benchmark of 14 languages built from regional regulations, comparing 11 guardrail baselines. It shows research interest in multilingual guard evaluation.
Checked 2026-10-17
Risks
- Small market and low urgency until someone gets hit publicly
- Guard vendors may fix the gap with multilingual training
- Machine translation noise can be mistaken for guard failure
Strong buildability; market pull is the weak point (5).
tech 8 · pull 5 · space 7 · fit 8 · build 9
Momentum of its main topic
Sources
Status history
- 2026-10-17 Flagged as buildable