LoCoBench-Agent: An Interactive Benchmark for LLM Agents in Long-Context Software Engineering

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.13998v1
• Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 23:57:24 GMT
• Title: LoCoBench-Agent: An Interactive Benchmark for LLM Agents in Long-Context Software Engineering
• Authors: Jielin Qiu, Zuxin Liu, Zhiwei Liu, Rithesh Murthy, Jianguo Zhang, Haolin Chen, Shiyu Wang, Ming Zhu, Liangwei Yang, Juntao Tan, Roshan Ram, Akshara Prabhakar, Tulika Awalgaonkar, Zixiang Chen, Zhepeng Cen, Cheng Qian, Shelby Heinecke, Weiran Yao, Silvio Savarese, Caiming Xiong, Huan Wang,
• Abstract summary: We introduce textbfLoCoBench-Agent, a comprehensive evaluation framework specifically designed to assess large language models (LLMs) agents in realistic, long-context software engineering.<n>Our framework extends LoCoBench's 8,000 scenarios into interactive agent environments, enabling systematic evaluation of multi-turn conversations.<n>Our framework provides agents with 8 specialized tools (file operations, search, code analysis) and evaluates them across context lengths ranging from 10K to 1M tokens.
• Score: 90.84806758077536
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) evolve into sophisticated autonomous agents capable of complex software development tasks, evaluating their real-world capabilities becomes critical. While existing benchmarks like LoCoBench~\cite{qiu2025locobench} assess long-context code understanding, they focus on single-turn evaluation and cannot capture the multi-turn interactive nature, tool usage patterns, and adaptive reasoning required by real-world coding agents. We introduce \textbf{LoCoBench-Agent}, a comprehensive evaluation framework specifically designed to assess LLM agents in realistic, long-context software engineering workflows. Our framework extends LoCoBench's 8,000 scenarios into interactive agent environments, enabling systematic evaluation of multi-turn conversations, tool usage efficiency, error recovery, and architectural consistency across extended development sessions. We also introduce an evaluation methodology with 9 metrics across comprehension and efficiency dimensions. Our framework provides agents with 8 specialized tools (file operations, search, code analysis) and evaluates them across context lengths ranging from 10K to 1M tokens, enabling precise assessment of long-context performance. Through systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art models, we reveal several key findings: (1) agents exhibit remarkable long-context robustness; (2) comprehension-efficiency trade-off exists with negative correlation, where thorough exploration increases comprehension but reduces efficiency; and (3) conversation efficiency varies dramatically across models, with strategic tool usage patterns differentiating high-performing agents. As the first long-context LLM agent benchmark for software engineering, LoCoBench-Agent establishes a rigorous foundation for measuring agent capabilities, identifying performance gaps, and advancing autonomous software development at scale.

Related papers

• AgentMath: Empowering Mathematical Reasoning for Large Language Models via Tool-Augmented Agent [80.83250816918861]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) like o3 and DeepSeek-R1 have achieved remarkable progress in natural language reasoning with long chain-of-thought.<n>However, they remain computationally inefficient and struggle with accuracy when solving problems requiring complex mathematical operations.<n>We present AgentMath, an agent framework that seamlessly integrates language models' reasoning capabilities with code interpreters' computational precision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-23T19:57:49Z)
• SWE-Compass: Towards Unified Evaluation of Agentic Coding Abilities for Large Language Models [59.90381306452982]
  evaluating large language models (LLMs) for software engineering has been limited by narrow task coverage, language bias, and insufficient alignment with real-world developer.<n>We introduce SWE-1, a comprehensive benchmark that unifies heterogeneous code-related evaluations into a structured and production-aligned framework.<n>SWE- spans 8 task types, 8 programming scenarios, and 10 programming languages, with 2000 high-quality instances curated from authentic GitHub pull requests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-07T18:01:32Z)
• How can we assess human-agent interactions? Case studies in software agent design [52.953425368394306]
  We make two major steps towards the rigorous assessment of human-agent interactions.<n>We propose PULSE, a framework for more efficient human-centric evaluation of agent designs.<n>We deploy the framework on a large-scale web platform built around the open-source software agent OpenHands.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-10T19:04:28Z)
• Estimating the Empowerment of Language Model Agents [4.9877302321739725]
  EELMA is an algorithm for approximating effective empowerment from multi-turn text interactions.<n>We validate EELMA on both language games and scaled-up realistic web-browsing scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T15:46:14Z)
• LoCoBench: A Benchmark for Long-Context Large Language Models in Complex Software Engineering [85.58151741052616]
  LoCoBench is a benchmark specifically designed to evaluate long-context LLMs in realistic, complex software development scenarios.<n>Our benchmark provides 8,000 evaluation scenarios systematically generated across 10 programming languages.<n>LoCoBench introduces 8 task categories that capture essential long-context understanding capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-11T16:55:04Z)
• CREW-WILDFIRE: Benchmarking Agentic Multi-Agent Collaborations at Scale [4.464959191643012]
  We introduce CREW-Wildfire, an open-source benchmark designed to evaluate next-generation multi-agent Agentic AI frameworks.<n> CREW-Wildfire offers procedurally generated wildfire response scenarios featuring large maps, heterogeneous agents, partial observability, dynamics, and long-horizon planning objectives.<n>We implement and evaluate several state-of-the-art LLM-based multi-agent Agentic AI frameworks, uncovering significant performance gaps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-07T16:33:42Z)
• 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)
• TRAIL: Trace Reasoning and Agentic Issue Localization [5.025960714013197]
  This work articulates the need for robust and dynamic evaluation methods for agentic workflow traces.<n>We present a set of 148 large human-annotated traces (TRAIL) constructed using this taxonomy and grounded in established agentic benchmarks.<n>To ensure ecological validity, we curate traces from both single and multi-agent systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-13T14:55:31Z)
• Adaptive Tool Use in Large Language Models with Meta-Cognition Trigger [49.81945268343162]
  We propose MeCo, an adaptive decision-making strategy for external tool use.<n>MeCo quantifies metacognitive scores by capturing high-level cognitive signals in the representation space.<n>MeCo is fine-tuning-free and incurs minimal cost.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T15:45:01Z)
• Dynamic benchmarking framework for LLM-based conversational data capture [0.0]
  This paper introduces a benchmarking framework to assess large language models (LLMs)<n>It integrates generative agent simulation to evaluate performance on key dimensions: information extraction, context awareness, and adaptive engagement.<n>Results show that adaptive strategies improve data extraction accuracy, especially when handling ambiguous responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T15:47:47Z)
• MAgIC: Investigation of Large Language Model Powered Multi-Agent in Cognition, Adaptability, Rationality and Collaboration [98.18244218156492]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly advanced natural language processing.<n>As their applications expand into multi-agent environments, there arises a need for a comprehensive evaluation framework.<n>This work introduces a novel competition-based benchmark framework to assess LLMs within multi-agent settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T21:46:27Z)

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.