What Makes a Good Bug Report for an AI Agent?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.07593v1
• Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2026 16:13:15 GMT
• Title: What Makes a Good Bug Report for an AI Agent?
• Abstract summary: A good bug report for an agent overlaps with, but is not identical to, a good report for a human.<n> fix suggestions, reproduction scripts, repository source code, and localization info are associated with higher resolution likelihood.<n>Some qualities long emphasized for human readers, such as natural language steps to reproduce and readable descriptions, contribute little or even correlate with lower success.
• Score: 8.139494830308486
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Automated program repair (APR) agents are transitioning from research benchmarks to developer workflows, yet they still begin with bug reports written for human developers. While decades of research have established what makes a good bug report for humans (e.g., steps to reproduce, stack traces), it remains unclear whether these features transfer to LLM-based agents. We study this question in two analyses. First, we use statistical modeling to examine associations between 27 bug-report features and repair success across 433 SWE-bench Verified issues attempted by 87 repair agents. We find that fix suggestions, reproduction scripts, repository source code, and localization info are associated with higher resolution likelihood, while longer reports are associated with lower odds. Second, we conduct controlled ablations across 2 models and 17 problem-statement mutations on SWE-bench Pro, varying the information available to an agent while holding the underlying task fixed. We remove or isolate selected bug-report content, delete fault-localization cues, and test structural changes that flatten lists or remove section headers. We find that both models depend on localization cues and expected behavior, and that structural changes alone can reduce solve rates, even without removing any content. The two models diverge in how they handle missing information: Qwen searches more widely and can exhaust its turn budget, while Gemma commits to a plausible interpretation early and patches on it. Our findings indicate that a good bug report for an agent overlaps with, but is not identical to, a good report for a human: agents benefit most from concrete, executable, and well-localized information, whereas some qualities long emphasized for human readers, such as natural language steps to reproduce and readable descriptions, contribute little or even correlate with lower success.

Related papers

• Who is the Agent to Blame? Localizing Faithfulness and Citation Mistakes in Agentic Deep Research [75.8770212601511]
  Deep research (DR) systems produce long-form cited reports by orchestrating multiple agents that search and synthesize information from the web.<n> Citations are the primary mechanism for evaluating the faithfulness of these reports, yet current DR systems exhibit poor citation recall.<n>We propose an evaluation method that pinpoints which agent introduced each error by locally testing agent invocations for faithfulness and verifiability relative to their own inputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-25T09:34:18Z)
• Semantic Drift in Bug Resolution: How Behavioral Signals Propagate from Reports to Tests and Patches [18.727291516223115]
  Desc2Fix is a framework for measuring semantic alignment between bug reports, triggering tests, and developer-written fixes.<n>We analyze 2,857 report-test-patch triplets from Defects4J and SWT-Bench using GPT-4o and DeepSeek-Chat.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-20T22:32:23Z)
• Understanding Agent-Reactive Bugs at the Model-Harness Boundary: An Empirical Study of LLM Agent Issue Reports [9.560342483305371]
  This study is the first empirical study focused on agent-reactive (AR) bugs.<n>Our findings show that many AR bugs manifest as silent errors without well-defined test oracles.<n>These findings point to the need for mechanisms that help users and developers understand the root causes and resolutions of AR bugs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-17T06:53:31Z)
• Writing Bug Reports for Software Repair Agents: What Information Matters Most? [45.10027008889631]
  We study what makes a bug report agent-ready.<n>We focus on the 441 issues representing bug reports.<n>Our results suggest that agentic-first reports benefit most from information that narrows the agent's search and repair space.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-10T16:00:57Z)
• 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)
• TRAJEVAL: Decomposing Code Agent Trajectories for Fine-Grained Diagnosis [23.834704102474927]
  Code agents can resolve GitHub issues, yet when they fail, current evaluation provides no visibility into where or why.<n>We introduce TRAJEVAL, a diagnostic framework that decomposes agent trajectories into three interpretable stages.<n>We validate that these diagnostics are predictive, achieving model-level Pass@1 prediction within 0.87-2.1% MAE.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-25T05:27:03Z)
• 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)
• DoVer: Intervention-Driven Auto Debugging for LLM Multi-Agent Systems [48.971606069204825]
  DoVer is an intervention-driven debug framework for large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems.<n>It augments hypothesis generation with active verification through targeted interventions.<n>DoVer flips 18-28% of failed trials into successes, achieves up to 16% milestone progress, and validates or refutes 30-60% of failure hypotheses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-07T09:23:48Z)
• BugPilot: Complex Bug Generation for Efficient Learning of SWE Skills [59.003563837981886]
  High quality bugs are key to training the next generation of language model based software engineering (SWE) agents.<n>We introduce a novel method for synthetic generation of difficult and diverse bugs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-22T17:58:56Z)
• Where LLM Agents Fail and How They can Learn From Failures [62.196870049524364]
  Large Language Model (LLM) agents have shown promise in solving complex, multi-step tasks.<n>They amplify vulnerability to cascading failures, where a single root-cause error propagates through subsequent decisions.<n>Current systems lack a framework that can comprehensively understand agent error in a modular and systemic way.<n>We introduce the AgentErrorTaxonomy, a modular classification of failure modes spanning memory, reflection, planning, action, and system-level operations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T18:20:27Z)
• Evaluating Agent-based Program Repair at Google [9.62742759337993]
  Agent-based program repair offers to automatically resolve complex bugs end-to-end.<n>Recent work has explored the use of agent-based repair approaches on the popular open-source SWE-Bench.<n>This paper explores the viability of using an agentic approach to address bugs in an enterprise context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-13T18:09:25Z)
• SEDAC: A CVAE-Based Data Augmentation Method for Security Bug Report Identification [0.0]
  In the real world, the ratio of security bug reports is severely low. SEDAC is a new SBR identification method that generates similar bug report vectors. It outperforms all the baselines in g-measure with improvements of around 14.24%-50.10%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-22T15:53:52Z)
• Auto-labelling of Bug Report using Natural Language Processing [0.0]
  Rule and Query-based solutions recommend a long list of potential similar bug reports with no clear ranking. In this paper, we have proposed a solution using a combination of NLP techniques. It uses a custom data transformer, a deep neural network, and a non-generalizing machine learning method to retrieve existing identical bug reports.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-13T02:32:42Z)

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.