CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.AI2026-07-21

CodeRescue: Budget-Calibrated Recovery Routing for Coding Agents

Qijia He, Jiayi Cheng, Chenqian Le, Rui Wang, Xunmei Liu, Yixian Chen, Jie Mei, Zhihao Wang, Xupeng Chen, Yuhuan Chen, Tao Wang

Coding agents increasingly operate in executable environments where a failed attempt produces actionable feedback rather than merely an incorrect answer. Existing cost-aware systems typically treat such failures as cascade decisions: try a cheap model first, then escalate hard cases to a stronger and more expensive model. In coding, however, execution feedback can also make further cheap-model recovery worthwhile, raising a budgeted deployment question: when should an agent spend more cheap compute, and when should it escalate? We formulate this post-failure decision as recovery routing over heterogeneous actions and train a supervised router from execution rollouts. To make the same router usable under changing budgets, we add a Conformal Risk Control (CRC) layer that selects a deployment-time cost penalty without retraining and provides marginal expected-cost control under exchangeability. Across held-out failures from five coding benchmarks, cheap recovery and escalation exhibit complementary success patterns. The calibrated frontier improves over fixed actions, prompt-only routers, and a binary cascade baseline; in the main GPT-5.4-nano/GPT-5.4 setting, one CRC-calibrated frontier point exceeds always-escalate solve rate while using 35% of its mean recovery cost. Code is available at https://github.com/Qijia-He/agent-budget-control.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.SEcs.AIcs.LG2026-07-12

When Does Restricting a Coding Agent to execute_code Help? A Regime $\times$ Agent-Design Ablation

Hong Yang, Qi Yu, Travis Desell

Modern coding agents expose multiple tool surfaces -- IDE primitives, bash, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) code-execution -- and the field has shipped three contradictory claims about which one matters. We run the missing crossed comparison: an integrity-clean three-arm ablatio…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CRcs.AIcs.SE2026-07-22

IssueTrojanBench: Benchmarking AI Coding Agents Against Malicious Issue Requests

Ankur Singh, Jinqiu Yang, Tse-Hsun Chen

AI coding agents powered by LLMs are increasingly integrated into real-world software development, where they generate, edit, and execute code with autonomous access to local files and tools. Coding agents inherit security risks from both the LLM backbone, where adversarial promp…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.SEcs.AIcs.LG2026-07-04

Don't Blame the Large Language Model: How Agent Harness Evolution Shapes Coding Agent Quality

Oussama Ben Sghaier, Hao Li, Bram Adams, Ahmed E. Hassan

Coding agents, autonomous systems that use large language models (LLMs) to resolve software engineering tasks, rely on agent harness: a middleware layer in between a developer and a large language model that orchestrates system prompts, tool execution, context management, and ite…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.SEcs.AI2026-07-10

Failure as a Process: An Anatomy of CLI Coding Agent Trajectories

Xiangxin Zhao, Han Li, Shuaiting Li, Tianyi Zhao, Earl T. Barr, Federica Sarro, et al.

Large language model (LLM) coding agents are increasingly deployed to autonomously perform software engineering tasks in terminal-based environments, making their reliability a growing concern. Existing empirical studies investigate why coding agents fail, yet they largely treat…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.LGcs.AIcs.PF2026-06-29

TraceLab: Characterizing Coding Agent Workloads for LLM Serving

Kan Zhu, Mathew Jacob, Chenxi Ma, Yi Pan, Stephanie Wang, Arvind Krishnamurthy, et al.

Coding agents are rapidly becoming a major application of agentic LLMs, but serving them efficiently remains challenging. Progress on this challenge requires understanding real workload patterns, yet the data needed for such analysis is largely absent. Existing public traces and…

View free PDFSource page