How Coding Agents Fail Their Users: A Large-Scale Analysis of Developer-Agent Misalignment in 20,574 Real-World Sessions

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.29442v1
• Date: Thu, 28 May 2026 06:35:39 GMT
• Title: How Coding Agents Fail Their Users: A Large-Scale Analysis of Developer-Agent Misalignment in 20,574 Real-World Sessions
• Abstract summary: We operationalize misalignment as a breakdown made visible through developer pushback.<n>We identify seven recurring forms, spanning how agents read projects, interpret developer intent, follow rules, bound their actions, implement and execute code, and report progress.<n>Our findings inform the design of training, evaluation, and interfaces for keeping coding agents aligned with real developer.
• Score: 16.8655550230265
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: AI coding agents increasingly act directly within software environments, yet existing analyses of their failures rely on benchmark trajectories that miss how developers actually experience misalignment. We present an observational study of 20,574 coding-agent sessions from 1,639 repositories across IDE and CLI workflows. We operationalize misalignment as a breakdown made visible through developer pushback, and annotate each episode along four axes: form, cause, cost, and resolution. We identify seven recurring forms, spanning how agents read projects, interpret developer intent, follow rules, bound their actions, implement and execute code, and report progress. 90.50\% of episodes impose effort and trust costs rather than irreversible system damage, yet 91.49\% of visible resolutions still require explicit user correction. Misalignment patterns also differ across IDE and CLI settings, persist across adjacent sessions, and shift over time: while overall rates decline, constraint violations and inaccurate self-reporting grow in share. Our findings inform the design of training, evaluation, and interfaces for keeping coding agents aligned with real developer workflows.

Related papers

• MTAC-IFBench: Benchmarking Instruction-Following in Multi-Turn Agentic Coding [83.0805548642958]
  MTAC-IFBench is a comprehensive benchmark for instruction-following in software development.<n>It features multi-turn progressive software development instructions with diverse constraints spanning 6 primary and 18 secondary categories.<n>MTAC-IFBench identifies significant deficiencies in existing code agents in multi-turn instruction-following, with their performance degrading rapidly as the interaction session grows longer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-14T03:57:37Z)
• How Do Practitioners Build SE Agents? Insights from a Mixed-Methods Study [14.012434371282382]
  This paper is the first to study how Software Engineering processes are changing in the development of SE agents.<n>We characterize a seven-stage workflow and a shift toward evaluation-driven development.<n>We identify six challenges that teams face, together with the practices they adopt to address them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-12T17:40:36Z)
• ClawArena: Benchmarking AI Agents in Evolving Information Environments [61.664633997138004]
  ClawArena is a benchmark for evaluating AI agents in evolving information environments.<n>Each scenario maintains a complete hidden ground truth while exposing the agent only to noisy, partial, and sometimes contradictory traces.<n> evaluation is organized around three coupled challenges: multi-source conflict reasoning, dynamic belief revision, and implicit personalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-05T17:55:23Z)
• Beyond Isolated Tasks: A Framework for Evaluating Coding Agents on Sequential Software Evolution [5.10403054516716]
  Existing datasets evaluate performance on isolated, single pull request (PR) tasks in a stateless manner.<n>We introduce an automated coding task generation framework, which helps generate our dataset SWE-STEPS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-03T13:44:40Z)
• SlopCodeBench: Benchmarking How Coding Agents Degrade Over Long-Horizon Iterative Tasks [55.76734816061826]
  We introduce SlopCodeBench, a language-agnostic benchmark comprising 20 problems and 93 checkpoints.<n>We track two trajectory-level quality signals: verbosity, the fraction of redundant or duplicated code, and structural erosion.<n>No agent solves any problem end-to-end across 11 models; the highest checkpoint solve rate is 17.2%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-25T19:26:44Z)
• Dynamic analysis enhances issue resolution [53.50448142467294]
  DAIRA (Dynamic Analysis-enhanced Issue Resolution Agent) is an automated repair framework that embeds dynamic analysis into the agent's reasoning cycle.<n> Driven by a Test Tracing-Driven methodology, DAIRA utilizes lightweight monitors to extract critical runtime data.<n>When powered by Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DAIRA establishes a new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance, achieving a 79.4% resolution rate on the SWE-bench Verified dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-23T14:48:54Z)
• BeyondSWE: Can Current Code Agent Survive Beyond Single-Repo Bug Fixing? [61.247730037229815]
  We introduce BeyondSWE, a comprehensive benchmark that broadens existing evaluations along two axes - resolution scope and knowledge scope.<n>To investigate the role of external knowledge, we develop SearchSWE, a framework that integrates deep search with coding abilities.<n>This work offers both a realistic, challenging evaluation benchmark and a flexible framework to advance research toward more capable code agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-03T17:52:01Z)
• ET-Agent: Incentivizing Effective Tool-Integrated Reasoning Agent via Behavior Calibration [68.89572566071575]
  ETAgent is a training framework for calibrating agent's tool-use behavior.<n>It is designed to progressively calibrate erroneous behavioral patterns to optimal behaviors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-11T11:05:26Z)
• Beyond Final Code: A Process-Oriented Error Analysis of Software Development Agents in Real-World GitHub Scenarios [31.749442120603774]
  Python execution errors during the issue resolution phase correlate with lower resolution rates and increased reasoning overheads.<n>We have identified the most prevalent errors -- such as ModuleNotFoundError and TypeError -- and highlighted particularly challenging errors like OSError and database-related issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-16T06:24:51Z)
• Defining and Detecting the Defects of the Large Language Model-based Autonomous Agents [31.126001253902416]
  We present the first study focused on identifying and detecting defects in LLM Agents.<n>We collected and analyzed 6,854 relevant posts from StackOverflow to define 8 types of agent defects.<n>Our results show that Agentable achieved an overall accuracy of 88.79% and a recall rate of 91.03%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-24T11:54:14Z)

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.