Small but Mighty: Test Suites as Improvement Signals for Self-Evolving Agents
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2607. 02469v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Software tests and code evolve together: a code change should be followed by new or updated tests that record the new software behavior.
arXiv:2607. 08124v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The behavior of an LLM agent is determined not only by the underlying model, but also by its harness: the executable program that constructs context, invokes tools, verifies intermediate results, and recovers from failures.
arXiv:2606. 08106v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Self-evolving agents improve by repeatedly proposing changes to their own prompts, skills, or workflows and keeping those that score higher on a small held-out set.
arXiv:2608. 07545v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: An LLM agent's capability depends not only on model weights but on its harness: prompts, tools, skills, and control flow.
arXiv:2607. 05666v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI coding agents are black boxes: we cannot inspect how they generate code, but we can inspect what they change.
arXiv:2610.17609v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Training-free self-improvement lets an agent use feedback to revise the response it is about to return and to update the harness state that shapes how...