mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Agentic Property-Based Testing: Finding Bugs Across the Python Ecosystem

arXiv 2510.09907 ↗First posted 10 Oct 2025cs.SE cs.AIcited by 7

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

Property-based testing (PBT) is a lightweight formal method, typically implemented as a randomized testing framework. Users specify the input domain for their test using combinators supplied by the PBT framework, and the expected properties or invariants as a unit-test function. The framework then searches for a counterexample, e.g. by generating inputs and calling the test function. In this work, we demonstrate an LLM-based agent which analyzes Python modules, infers function-specific and cross-function properties from code and documentation, synthesizes and executes PBTs, reflects on outputs of these tests to confirm true bugs, and finally outputs actionable bug reports for the developer. We perform an extensive evaluation of our agent across 100 popular Python packages. Of the bug reports generated by the agent, we found after manual review that 56% were valid bugs and 32% were valid bugs that we would report to maintainers. We then developed a ranking rubric to surface high-priority valid bugs to developers, and found that of the 21 top-scoring bugs, 86% were valid and 81% we would report. The bugs span diverse failure modes from serialization failures to numerical precision errors to flawed cache implementations. We reported 5 bugs, 4 with patches, including to NumPy and cloud computing SDKs, with 3 patches merged successfully. Our results suggest that LLMs with PBT provides a rigorous and scalable method for autonomously testing software. Our code and artifacts are available at: https://github.com/mmaaz-git/agentic-pbt.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 4 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Oct 2025.

Builds on

4 of 18 references.

References · 4

  1. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,502
  2. 2023Software Testing with Large Language Models: Survey, Landscape, and Visioncited by 164
  3. 2023Can Large Language Models Write Good Property-Based Tests?cited by 30
  4. 2025Effective LLM Code Refinement via Property-Oriented and Structurally Minimal Feedbackcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 13 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 6.

7 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026FVSpec: Real-World Property-Based Tests as Lean Challenges
  2. 2026LogicHunter: Testing LLM Agent Frameworks with an Agentic Oracle
  3. 2026VibeCheck: Assessing the Quality of LLM-Generated Unit Tests: A Multi-agent Empirical Study across Heterogeneous Repositories
  4. 2024PyBench: Evaluating LLM Agent on various real-world coding tasks
  5. 2026Are Coding Agents Generating Over-Mocked Tests? An Empirical Study
  6. 2026Code Broker: A Multi-Agent System for Automated Code Quality Assessment
  7. 2025TestForge: Feedback-Driven, Agentic Test Suite Generation
  8. 2026Automated structural testing of LLM-based agents: methods, framework, and case studies