arXiv:2606. 11976v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Software engineering tools increasingly rely on LLM based agents to localize files to change to resolve a software issue.
Software engineering tools increasingly rely on LLM based agents to localize files to change to resolve a software issue. Most AI agents explore repositories linearly, that is, visiting one directory or file per step.
arXiv:2605. 17965v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Bug localization remains a key bottleneck for large language model (LLM)-based software maintenance, where accurately identifying faulty code is essential for debugging, root cause analysis, triage, and automated program repair (APR).
arXiv:2607. 01916v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model agents can repair real repository issues, but they often spend large context budgets on whole-file reads, broad searches, and long terminal outputs where useful evidence is mixed with irrelevant code and logs.
arXiv:2608. 05886v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern LLM coding agents such as Claude Code and OpenHands share a common inefficiency: they spend much of their token budget finding the file to patch, rather than patching it.
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:2606. 12344v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: General-purpose agents such as OpenClaw are increasingly used as autonomous tool users, but their coding ability is difficult to measure under SWE-bench: a generic agent does not by itself satisfy the clean Docker workspace, patch, and prediction contract required for scoring.
arXiv:2607. 00016v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Information localization within massive repositories is a cornerstone of agentic LLM systems.
General-purpose agents such as OpenClaw are increasingly used as autonomous tool users, but their coding ability is difficult to measure under SWE-bench: a generic agent does not by itself satisfy the clean Docker workspace, patch, and prediction contract required for scoring. We introduce Claw-SWE-Bench, a multilingual SWE-bench-style benchmark and adapter protocol that makes heterogeneous agent harnesses, or claws, comparable under fair settings including a fixed prompt, runtime budget, workspace contract, patch extraction procedure, and evaluator.
Modern LLM coding agents such as Claude Code and OpenHands share a common inefficiency: they spend much of their token budget finding the file to patch, rather than patching it. On SWE-Bench Verified, a 30B OpenHands agent averages 23 rounds and 631K tokens per resolved issue, with many calls spent on grep, glob, and view_file during repository exploration.
arXiv:2607. 24882v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern coding agents are usually evaluated by whether they eventually produce a correct patch, but patch generation depends on an earlier context-acquisition stage: finding the repository files needed for the task.
arXiv:2607. 19653v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents now perform well on correctness-oriented repository-level tasks, including SWE-Bench issue resolution and feature implementation in real codebases.