Early Adoption of Agentic Coding Tools by GitHub Projects

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.14037v2
• Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2026 16:57:06 GMT
• Title: Early Adoption of Agentic Coding Tools by GitHub Projects
• Abstract summary: We analyze 25,264 pull requests (PRs) from 2,361 popular GitHub repositories.<n>Our results show that the median repository generates only one to two agentic PRs during a three-month period.<n>Small projects exhibit higher participation ratios and average levels of agentic PR activity than medium-sized and large projects.
• Score: 0.9310318514564272
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Agentic coding tools are increasingly capable of generating and submitting pull requests (PRs) to software projects, introducing new forms of human-agent collaboration in software development. While prior studies have examined PR-level outcomes of agent-generated contributions, less is known about how agentic coding tools are adopted and managed at the project level. In this paper, we analyze 25,264 agentic PRs from 2,361 popular GitHub repositories to investigate (1) the adoption of agentic coding tools, (2) project-level agentic PR productivity, and (3) human-agent collaboration patterns. Our results show that the median repository generates only one to two agentic PRs during a three-month period, indicating that intensive adoption remains concentrated in a small subset of projects. At the same time, small projects (1-5 contributors) exhibit higher participation ratios and average levels of agentic PR activity than medium-sized and large projects. We also observe substantial variation in project-level agentic PR productivity. While a small number of projects exceed an industry-reported estimate of 36 PRs per participant during the three-month observation period, most projects remain below this threshold. Finally, human-agent collaboration is dominated by a single-human oversight model, in which one developer reviews and/or modifies the agent's contributions, while multi-human collaboration patterns remain uncommon. These findings provide early empirical evidence on how open-source projects organize human oversight around agentic coding tools and suggest that successful integration of agent-generated contributions depends not only on advances in agent capabilities but also on the human and organizational processes that govern their use. Because this study captures an early snapshot of agent adoption, future work should continue to track how adoption patterns evolve over time.

Related papers

• How Do AI Coding Agents Contribute to Software Development? an Empirical Study of Agentic Pull Requests [5.6795075579540395]
  This study aims to characterize agentic pull requests (PR) in comparison to human generated PRs.<n>We first analyze how differences in merge rates between agentic and human generated PRs vary over time.<n>We then identify the types of development tasks where AI coding agents are predominantly applied.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-23T21:48:28Z)
• Humans Integrate, Agents Fix: How Agent-Authored Pull Requests Are Referenced in Practice [4.359007050137919]
  We introduce a taxonomy to characterize the intent of agent-authored PR references across Human-to-Agent and Agent-to-Agent interactions.<n>Our analysis shows that while humans initiate most references to agent-authored PRs, a substantial portion of these interactions are AI-assisted.<n>We find that referencing/referenced PRs are associated with substantially longer lifespan and review times compared to isolated PRs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-05T11:04:46Z)
• AgentArk: Distilling Multi-Agent Intelligence into a Single LLM Agent [57.10083973844841]
  AgentArk is a novel framework to distill multi-agent dynamics into the weights of a single model.<n>We investigate three hierarchical distillation strategies across various models, tasks, scaling, and scenarios.<n>By shifting the burden of computation from inference to training, the distilled models preserve the efficiency of one agent while exhibiting strong reasoning and self-correction performance of multiple agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T19:18:28Z)
• A Task-Level Evaluation of AI Agents in Open-Source Projects [0.0]
  We present a comparative study of five autonomous coding agents using AIDev-pop.<n>We evaluate agents' performance along three task-aware dimensions spanning the PR lifecycle.<n>Our findings inform selection and improvements of AI agents for their effective integration to collaborative software engineering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T17:05:19Z)
• Are We All Using Agents the Same Way? An Empirical Study of Core and Peripheral Developers Use of Coding Agents [4.744786007044749]
  We study how core and peripheral developers use, review, modify, and verify agent-generated contributions prior to acceptance.<n>A subset of peripheral developers use agents more often, delegating tasks evenly across bug fixing, feature addition, documentation, and testing.<n>In contrast, core developers focus more on documentation and testing, yet their agentic PRs are frequently merged into the main/master branch.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-27T22:50:01Z)
• From Correctness to Collaboration: Toward a Human-Centered Framework for Evaluating AI Agent Behavior in Software Engineering [7.402388519535592]
  Current benchmarks, focused on code correctness, fail to capture the nuanced, interactive behaviors essential for successful human-AI partnership.<n>We present a foundational taxonomy of desirable agent behaviors for enterprise software engineering.<n>We also introduce the Context-Adaptive Behavior (CAB) Framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-29T20:18:57Z)
• Alita-G: Self-Evolving Generative Agent for Agent Generation [54.49365835457433]
  We present ALITA-G, a framework that transforms a general-purpose agent into a domain expert.<n>In this framework, a generalist agent executes a curated suite of target-domain tasks.<n>It attains strong gains while reducing computation costs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-27T17:59:14Z)
• TOM-SWE: User Mental Modeling For Software Engineering Agents [75.28749912645127]
  ToM-SWE is a dual-agent architecture that pairs a primary software-engineering (SWE) agent with a lightweight theory-of-mind (ToM) partner agent.<n>ToM-SWE infers user goals, constraints, and preferences from instructions and interaction history.<n>In two software engineering benchmarks, ToM-SWE improves task success rates and user satisfaction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T16:09:51Z)
• 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)
• On the Use of Agentic Coding: An Empirical Study of Pull Requests on GitHub [6.7302091035327285]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being integrated into software development processes.<n>The ability to generate code and submit pull requests with minimal human intervention, through the use of autonomous AI agents, is poised to become a standard practice.<n>We empirically study 567 GitHub pull requests (PRs) generated using Claude Code, an agentic coding tool, across 157 open-source projects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-18T08:48:32Z)
• Scaling Agents via Continual Pre-training [80.97989245493326]
  We propose incorporating Agentic Continual Pre-training (Agentic CPT) into the deep research agents training pipeline to build powerful agentic foundational models.<n>We evaluate our AgentFounder-30B on 10 benchmarks and achieve state-of-the-art performance while retains strong tool-use ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-16T17:57:19Z)
• Code with Me or for Me? How Increasing AI Automation Transforms Developer Workflows [60.04362496037186]
  We present the first controlled study of developer interactions with coding agents.<n>We evaluate two leading copilot and agentic coding assistants.<n>Our results show agents can assist developers in ways that surpass copilots.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-10T20:12:54Z)

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.