This work proposes a framework for extracting reusable developer preferences from interaction traces, generates personalized skills through rule-based bootstrapping and evidence-grounded refinement, and evaluates them using a reproducible replay framework with an interactive, trajectory-conditioned LLM-based human developer simulator.
Abstract
Large language model (LLM)-powered agents have rapidly evolved from code-completion tools into solvers of complex software engineering tasks. As developers collaborate with coding agents over time, their preferences emerge through repeated interactions and can be used to adapt agent behavior to better meet individual developers'needs. Capturing and reusing these preferences may reduce repeated corrections and improve developer-agent collaboration. Agent skills provide a lightweight mechanism for transferring experience without modifying model parameters. However, existing work primarily focuses on task-specific skills, and it remains unclear whether developer-specific skills distilled from interaction histories can generalize to future tasks. We propose a framework for extracting reusable developer preferences from interaction traces. It first generates personalized skills through rule-based bootstrapping and evidence-grounded refinement, and then evaluates them using a reproducible replay framework with an interactive, trajectory-conditioned LLM-based human developer simulator. We conduct an experiment on 206 real-world developer-agent sessions from 13 developers and compare personalized skills against no-skill, generic-skill, and other-user-skill baselines. Personalized skills provide small and inconsistent improvements over the no-skill baseline, whereas generic skills pooled across developers achieve the largest and most consistent gains. Further analysis suggests that personalized skills become more effective when developer preferences appear frequently, particularly when their histories contain multiple examples relevant to future tasks. These findings provide empirical insights into when developer-specific personalization is effective and demonstrate that broadly transferable procedural knowledge can be more robust than developer-specific preference signals.
As Large Language Model (LLM) agents become integral to modern software systems, ``skills''have emerged as a novel unit of software reuse, enabling developers to package workflows, decision procedures, and prompt-based policies. While skills are intended for reuse, downstream developers frequently modify published skills to fit local contexts, yet little is known about the nature of such adaptations. This paper presents the first empirical study of downstream skill adaptation in public forks, to understand how published skills are adapted, and to provide implications for researchers and engineers on improving skill design, evolution, and orchestration. Specifically, we analyze 1,126 skill-adaptation instances from six widely adopted skill repositories and develop a taxonomy comprising 46 adaptation patterns organized into 13 families. Our key findings reveal a reuse paradox: although skills are intended to be easily imported and reused, developers spend a lot of effort rewriting what the skills do, fixing skill discoverability, and translating them for different tools and languages, indicating a need for better abstractions, standardized interfaces, and automated support for skill adaptation. Furthermore, adaptations are highly interdependent, with changes in one component often requiring coordinated updates elsewhere, motivating automated support for detecting inconsistent modifications. We also find that nearly one-fifth of adaptations introduce security-sensitive content within the same instruction text that governs behavior.
Xinjian Wu, Jingzhi Gong, Gunel Jahangirova et al.· 0 citations
AI agents are becoming a fundamental part of modern software creation, helping developers in generating code, debugging, designing systems, etc. But there is a clear difference between how beginners and experienced software engineers get benefits from these tools. Newbies usually depend on agents for one-time prompts and quick answers, whereas mature users utilize them through well-defined, repeated workflows that raise productivity and consistency. In this article, we discuss this difference and emphasize that getting the full potential does not merely depend on better prompts but on workflows driven by instructions developers create clear and reusable instruction files to direct agent behavior across tasks. When developers stop seeing agents only as chat interfaces but as programmable collaborators, they can produce more reliable and high-quality outputs. We offer in our paper methods like designing modular instructions, narrowing down the context, and iterative refinement loops, as well as a case study illustrating how a team made a code review more efficient and minimized the rework by making agent instructions standard. The results stress that structured forms of interaction rather than sporadic use are the main ways to tap into advanced features. Our paper provides a conceptual model for agent usage at large scale, hands-on advice for the implementation of instruction files in actual settings, and validation that skillful developers can far exceed basic usage by adopting orderly, system-like approaches to agent collaboration.
Madhurima Kommuru, Srujana Pulipaka· International Journal of Mod...· 0 citations
TestAgent, a multi-agent tool implemented as a VS Code extension that automates the generation of high-quality unit tests for Java projects using repository-level Code Knowledge Graphs, demonstrates its practical utility for regression testing and bug discovery.
Ye Shang, Quanjun Zhang, Zheng Zhan et al.· SIGSOFT FSE Companion· 0 citations
Large language model agents increasingly store reusable procedures outside the model. These reusable procedures are often called \emph{skills}: they may be code functions, natural-language instructions, SKILL.md packages, workflow graphs, or learned adapters that a future agent can retrieve and invoke. This taxonomy-driven survey asks how such skill libraries change over time. Across a $124$-paper $2023$--$2026$ audit set, we synthesize dynamic skill systems as \emph{lifecycle-managed, verified, evolving artifact stores}: agents collect evidence from interaction, propose skill updates, verify and admit candidates, organize them for retrieval and composition, repair or prune stale entries, and govern sharing through provenance and rollback. We organize the literature around three survey tools. First, a $\text{six}$-sense taxonomy distinguishes the structurally different artifacts called ``skills''in current papers. Second, an $\text{eight}$-stage lifecycle architecture identifies the recurring design decisions behind evidence acquisition, proposal, verification/admission, storage, retrieval/composition, maintenance, distillation/portability, and governance. Third, a lightweight skill-record schema and $\text{ten}$-operator vocabulary provide common terms for comparing library updates without elevating them into a separate method contribution. Using this structure, we synthesize evidence-graded patterns with explicit caveats: admission and repair are repeatedly important, verifier quality materially affects skill-aware RL, flat retrieval can degrade as libraries grow, and current benchmarks still under-report library trajectories, usage--utility gaps, and safety surfaces. We close with concrete reporting standards and open problems for evaluating dynamic skills as changing libraries rather than static prompt or tool collections.
Enterprise agent programs are moving from prototypes into production, where reusable skills, tools, and workflow packages must be reviewed with evidence rather than prose. Current gates often scan these artifacts for structure, style, and security, but they do not answer the deployment question: does the capability package help a live agent complete enterprise tasks under the same model, sandbox, and grading policy? We present ACES (Agentic Continuous Evaluation of Skills), a repository-native framework for evaluating skills and product capability packages as executable agent artifacts. ACES runs paired live trials with and without a target skill, normalizes trajectories into the Agent Trajectory Interchange Format (ATIF), grades six default runtime metrics, and reports Skill Lift: the target skill's added value for a fixed task, harness, workspace, and scorer. The same protocol supports product-owned task suites that compare baseline, skill, bundle, team-skill, and plugin targets. On 145 real skills from internal enterprise repositories and public catalogs, scan-only gates surface useful authoring issues but measure complementary facets (structural versus LLM-judge Spearman $\rho = 0.14$). Across 947 scored paired cases from 58 of 64 production skills and four primary harnesses, mean composite Skill Lift is 0.2134 (95\% paired-case CI [0.1967, 0.2301]); mean outcome-only lift, the average of accuracy and goal accuracy, is 0.1799. Composite lift is positive in 72.8\% of paired cases. The largest process-metric gains appear in skill execution, behavior check, and skill efficiency---signals about discovery, routing, workflow following, and tool use that document scans cannot observe. An open-source implementation of the methodology is available in NVIDIA SkillEvaluator.
Christopher Kevin, Narendran Raghavan, J. Puget et al.· 0 citations
Persistent context files (AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md) are standard practice for guiding AI coding agents, yet evidence for their effectiveness is contradictory. We present a controlled ablation of context-injection strategy across two frontier agents (Claude Code and Codex), 17 real tasks from 3 repositories (15 shared + 2 Codex-only), and 288 evaluated runs with gold-test evaluation. Context strategy does not measurably move correctness on either agent (bounded to<=10-15pp via equivalence testing). A failure-mode triage reveals why: agents fail on implementation skill---feature design, pattern selection, exact wiring---not missing repository knowledge that a context file could supply; a manipulation probe confirms the real AGENTS.md never converts a near-miss to a pass on either agent. We further show that borderline task difficulty is agent-specific (Spearman rho=0.75), offering a candidate explanation for prior contradictions: single-agent studies draw tasks from different agents'informative bands. We release all code, data, and analysis.