The paper explores whether natural‑language documentation aids coding agents in fixing software bugs and introduces a roundtrip benchmark that evaluates code descriptions by regenerating code and testing it. It finds that description completeness, not length, determines fidelity, and presents an optimizer that can produce fully faithful descriptions that generalize to new files. However, experiments across two model families and ten repositories show that such compact documentation does not improve an agent’s ability to resolve real repository issues compared to using the issue alone.
arXiv:2608. 10037v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rely on external tools to accomplish complex real-world tasks, making tool documentation a critical grounding resource for LLM agents.
arXiv:2606. 09090v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Developers increasingly provide AI coding assistants with persistent context through configuration files such as CLAUDE.
arXiv:2602.11988v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: A widespread practice in software development is to tailor coding agents to repositories using context files, such as AGENTS.md. Although thi...
arXiv:2605.14563v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Automated code documentation is essential for modern software development, providing the contextual grounding that both human developers and...
arXiv:2607. 01425v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Understanding large, complex codebases, especially those with obfuscated structures and incomplete documentation, remains a significant challenge.
arXiv:2608. 20195v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Technical documentation is written for human developers, but an increasing share of software changes is now authored by autonomous coding agents.
The study investigates how autonomous coding agents interact with technical documentation, analyzing 557 coding sessions and 33,097 pull requests. Findings reveal that agents primarily engage with agent-facing artefacts, show weak links between documentation consultation and code editing, lack explicit validation sequences, and tend to consult documentation after code changes. The authors propose a two‑lobed cycle model of agent‑documentation interaction and challenge assumptions about actionability and verifiability of agent‑friendly documentation.
arXiv:2509.21891v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Fine-tuning large language models for code editing has typically relied on mining commits and pull requests. The working hypothesis has been...
arXiv:2607. 03691v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Coding agents, autonomous systems that use large language models (LLMs) to resolve software engineering tasks, rely on agent harness: a middleware layer in between a developer and a large language model that orchestrates system prompts, tool execution, context management, and iterative reasoning loops.
arXiv:2608. 09072v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model-powered coding agents are increasingly used to modify existing code repositories, for example, by adding features or fixing bugs.
arXiv:2609.39909v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We introduce DoGBENCH (Documentation Generation Benchmark), to our knowledge, the first benchmark for generating and maintaining real user-facing sof...
arXiv:2609.22111v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model agents are increasingly capable of conducting research autonomously, producing research documents alongside the code and experimen...