Coding agents are ranked almost entirely by resolve rate: whether their final patch passes the target tests. Yet two agents can reach the same outcome through very different processes, and a single pass/fail label says nothing about why a run failed or why an accepted run spent extra steps, time, or tokens. This process evidence lives in the trajectory, which records a run's searches, reads, edits, tool calls, validation, and reversions. However, raw traces are heterogeneous and hard to compare across runs. We present TraceProbe, a trajectory-diagnostic framework that recovers what resolve rate hides. TraceProbe normalizes each raw run into a canonical nine-type action taxonomy with deterministic effect labels, then applies two rule-based modules: Insight names single-trajectory anti-patterns adapted from established debugging practice (e.g., search loops, verification skips), while Converge aligns pairs of runs and classifies where their behavior diverges under controlled references. Applying TraceProbe to 2,500 trajectories from five production settings on SWE-Bench Verified, we find that (i) file choice is too coarse to separate success from failure, whereas function selection and completion behavior localize it; (ii) Insight anti-patterns act mainly as corpus-level difficulty clues, with search loops the most stable; and (iii) even resolved runs differ in how quickly they reach relevant code and how much failed work they incur. Trajectory structure thus adds auditable diagnostic context to outcomes by localizing inspection targets, suggesting failure hypotheses, and prioritizing runs for review.
Rui Shu, Chun Yong Chong, Xin Zhou et al.· 1 citation
Large language model-powered coding agents are increasingly used to modify existing code repositories, for example, by adding features or fixing bugs. Yet existing repository-level benchmarks typically evaluate only whether the final patch passes tests. Satisfying a user request requires a long chain of interdependent reasoning and decisions: an agent must recover explicit and implicit requirements, formulate a repository-grounded implementation plan, and translate it into correct code. A pass/fail outcome cannot characterize how an unsuccessful trajectory diverges from the requirements and implementation process needed for a correct patch. To address this gap, we introduce SWE-RPG, a repository-level benchmark that combines executable patch evaluation with validated ground-truth references (GTs) for (1) Requirement Clarification and (2) Implementation Planning. These intermediate GTs support retrospective, GT-aligned diagnosis of complete coding-agent trajectories across clarification, planning, code generation, and artifact submission. SWE-RPG comprises 163 tasks from 31 Python and Java repositories, including 113 bug fixes and 50 feature additions. We evaluate 3 coding agents, including Claude Code, Codex, and OpenCode, with 6 large language model backends, including Claude-Sonnet-5 and GPT-5.6-Terra. Results show that the evaluated popular coding agents still struggle to implement user requests in existing repositories, achieving an average resolved rate of only 31.5% on SWE-RPG. Intermediate-GT diagnosis further identifies implicit requirement recovery as the main bottleneck, accounting for 24.5%--46.0% of agent runs. This result suggests implicit-requirement recovery as a key candidate direction for improving coding agents. The benchmark data and evaluation code are available at https://github.com/Xin-Zhou-smu/SWE-RPG-Bench.
Xin Zhou, Chun Yong Chong, Kisub Kim et al.· 0 citations