LLM Agents for Generating Microservice-based Applications: how complex is your specification?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.20119v2
• Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2025 14:39:52 GMT
• Title: LLM Agents for Generating Microservice-based Applications: how complex is your specification?
• Authors: Daniel M. Yellin,
• Abstract summary: We explore code synthesis for microservice-based applications.<n>We propose a metric for scoring the difficulty of a specification.<n>The higher the score, the more difficult it is to generate code for the specification.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In this paper we evaluate the capabilities of LLM Agents in generating code for real-world problems. Specifically, we explore code synthesis for microservice-based applications, a widely used architectural pattern for building applications. We define a standard template for specifying these applications, and we propose a metric for scoring the difficulty of a specification. The higher the score, the more difficult it is to generate code for the specification. Our experimental results show that agents using strong LLMs (like GPT-3o-mini) do fairly well on medium difficulty specifications but do poorly on those of higher difficulty levels. This is due to more intricate business logic, a greater use of external services, database integration and inclusion of non-functional capabilities such as authentication. We analyzed the errors in LLM-synthesized code and report on the key challenges LLM Agents face in generating code for these specifications. Finally, we show that using a fine-grained approach to code generation improves the correctness of the generated code.

Related papers

• Are LLMs Reliable Code Reviewers? Systematic Overcorrection in Requirement Conformance Judgement [8.059802912761919]
  We uncover a systematic failure of large language models (LLMs) in matching code to natural language requirements.<n>More detailed prompt design, particularly with those requiring explanations and proposed corrections, leads to higher misjudgment rates.<n>We propose a Fix-guided Verification Filter that treats the model proposed fix as executable counterfactual evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-28T08:35:25Z)
• Aligning Requirement for Large Language Model's Code Generation [9.205909320363247]
  Specine is a novel specification alignment technique for large language models (LLMs) code generation.<n>Its key idea is to identify misaligned input specifications, lift LLM-perceived specifications, and align them to enhance the code generation performance of LLMs.<n>For example, Specine outperforms the most effective baseline, achieving an average improvement of 29.60% across all subjects in terms of Pass@1.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-01T09:56:13Z)
• Uncovering Systematic Failures of LLMs in Verifying Code Against Natural Language Specifications [0.6813925418351435]
  Large language models (LLMs) have become essential tools in software development, widely used for requirements engineering, code generation and review tasks.<n>In this paper, we uncover a systematic failure of LLMs in evaluating whether code aligns with natural language requirements.<n>Our results reveal that LLMs frequently misclassify correct code implementations as either not satisfying requirements'' or containing potential defects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-17T13:07:26Z)
• On LLM-Assisted Generation of Smart Contracts from Business Processes [0.08192907805418582]
  Large language models (LLMs) have changed the reality of how software is produced.<n>We present an exploratory study to investigate the use of LLMs for generating smart contract code from business process descriptions.<n>Our results show that LLM performance falls short of the perfect reliability required for smart contract development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-30T20:39:45Z)
• AGENTIF: Benchmarking Instruction Following of Large Language Models in Agentic Scenarios [51.46347732659174]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated advanced capabilities in real-world agentic applications.<n>AgentIF is the first benchmark for systematically evaluating LLM instruction following ability in agentic scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T17:31:10Z)
• ToolScan: A Benchmark for Characterizing Errors in Tool-Use LLMs [77.79172008184415]
  TOOLSCAN is a new benchmark to identify error patterns in LLM output on tool-use tasks.<n>We show that even the most prominent LLMs exhibit these error patterns in their outputs.<n>Researchers can use these insights from TOOLSCAN to guide their error mitigation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-20T18:56:22Z)
• OpenCoder: The Open Cookbook for Top-Tier Code Large Language Models [76.59316249991657]
  Large language models (LLMs) for code have become indispensable in various domains, including code generation, reasoning tasks and agent systems.<n>While open-access code LLMs are increasingly approaching the performance levels of proprietary models, high-quality code LLMs remain limited.<n>We introduce OpenCoder, a top-tier code LLM that not only achieves performance comparable to leading models but also serves as an "open cookbook" for the research community.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-07T17:47:25Z)
• Combining LLM Code Generation with Formal Specifications and Reactive Program Synthesis [0.7580487359358722]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle with accuracy and are unsuitable for high-risk applications. We introduce a solution that divides the code generation into two parts; one to be handled by an LLM and one to be handled by formal methods-based program synthesis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-18T15:59:06Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [80.18342600996601]
  Large language models (LLMs) produce code that is shorter yet more complicated as compared to canonical solutions. We develop a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes that includes three categories and 12 sub-categories, and analyze the root cause for common bug types. We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code based on bug types and compiler feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• InfiBench: Evaluating the Question-Answering Capabilities of Code Large Language Models [56.723509505549536]
  InfiBench is the first large-scale freeform question-answering (QA) benchmark for code to our knowledge. It comprises 234 carefully selected high-quality Stack Overflow questions that span across 15 programming languages. We conduct a systematic evaluation for over 100 latest code LLMs on InfiBench, leading to a series of novel and insightful findings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-11T02:06:30Z)
• Grounding Data Science Code Generation with Input-Output Specifications [32.07033683677839]
  Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated a remarkable ability to generate code from natural language prompts. LLMs can have difficulty aligning their outputs with both the NL prompt and the I/O specification. We propose GIFT4Code, a novel approach for the instruction fine-tuning of LLMs with respect to I/O specifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-12T21:32:49Z)
• If LLM Is the Wizard, Then Code Is the Wand: A Survey on How Code Empowers Large Language Models to Serve as Intelligent Agents [81.60906807941188]
  Large language models (LLMs) are trained on a combination of natural language and formal language (code) Code translates high-level goals into executable steps, featuring standard syntax, logical consistency, abstraction, and modularity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-01T16:51:20Z)
• ML-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models and Agents for Machine Learning Tasks on Repository-Level Code [76.84199699772903]
  ML-Bench is a benchmark rooted in real-world programming applications that leverage existing code repositories to perform tasks. To evaluate both Large Language Models (LLMs) and AI agents, two setups are employed: ML-LLM-Bench for assessing LLMs' text-to-code conversion within a predefined deployment environment, and ML-Agent-Bench for testing autonomous agents in an end-to-end task execution within a Linux sandbox environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T12:03:21Z)
• Exploring Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning Techniques for Code Generation with Large Language Models [11.845239346943067]
  parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) is a promising approach to efficiently specialize large language models (LLMs) to task-specific data.<n>Our study highlights the potential for tuning larger LLMs and significant reductions in memory usage by combining PEFT with quantization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-21T04:31:06Z)
• Check Your Facts and Try Again: Improving Large Language Models with External Knowledge and Automated Feedback [127.75419038610455]
  Large language models (LLMs) are able to generate human-like, fluent responses for many downstream tasks. This paper proposes a LLM-Augmenter system, which augments a black-box LLM with a set of plug-and-play modules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-24T18:48:43Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.