arXiv:2605. 08717v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Software engineering agents are increasingly deployed in evaluable engineering environments, yet post-failure recovery remains costly, manual, and ad hoc.
Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2606. 01416v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-augmented large language model (LLM) agents rely on orchestration layers that coordinate planning, retrieval, tool invocation, validation, memory, and recovery.
Self-correction is particularly useful when a failure constrains the next repair. Coding agents benefit from this property because compilers, tests, and execution traces turn many failures into typed recovery signals, but broad language-agent tasks often expose only a coarse task failure.
arXiv:2608. 13867v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI coding agents are commonly evaluated as models but deployed as systems.
arXiv:2607. 18754v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agent failures are difficult to debug because the step where an error surfaces is often not the one that caused it.
arXiv:2606. 01365v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-using multi-agent large language model (LLM) systems spend computation through model tokens, tool calls, retries, and code execution before producing an answer.
arXiv:2608. 12002v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agents are increasingly considered for automating network operations and maintenance, where engineers must diagnose network faults, optimize configurations to enhance services, and reduce operational costs while acting under strict constraints.