More with Less: An Empirical Study of Turn-Control Strategies for Efficient Coding Agents
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
LLM-powered coding agents, which operate in iterative loops (turns) to solve software engineering tasks, are becoming increasingly powerful. However, their practical deployment is hindered by significant and unpredictable costs. This challenge arises from a combination of factors: quadratically growing token counts with each turn, the high price of models, the large number of turns required for real-world tasks, and the tendency of agents to take inefficient or unnecessary actions. While existing research focuses on optimizing individual turns, the strategic control of the total number of turns remains an underexplored area for managing agent performance and cost. To address this gap, we conduct a comprehensive empirical study on SWE-bench using three state-of-the-art models and evaluate the impact of three distinct turn-control strategies: an unrestricted baseline, a fixed-turn limit with reminders, and a novel dynamic-turn strategy that grants extensions on-demand. Our findings first reveal a fundamental trade-off in the unrestricted setting, where no single model excels across performance, cost, and turn efficiency. We then show that a fixed-turn limit, specifically at the 75th percentile of the baseline, serves as a "sweet spot", substantially reducing costs (by 24%-68%) with minimal impact on solve rates. Most significantly, the dynamic-turn strategy consistently outperforms fixed-limit approaches, achieving comparable or better solve rates while further reducing costs by an additional 12%-24% by intelligently allocating resources only to tasks that need them. This work provides the first systematic analysis of turn-control strategies, offering simple yet effective guidelines for developers to balance cost and efficacy. We demonstrate that dynamic resource allocation is a superior, easy-to-implement approach for deploying powerful yet economically viable coding agents.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 7 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Oct 2025.
Builds on
7 of 17 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 6
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,455
- 2023LLMLingua: Compressing Prompts for Accelerated Inference of Large Language Modelscited by 287
- 2024EVOR: Evolving Retrieval for Code Generationcited by 22
- 2024BudgetMLAgent: A Cost-Effective LLM Multi-Agent system for Automating Machine Learning Taskscited by 19
- 2025CodeAgents: A Token-Efficient Framework for Codified Multi-Agent Reasoning in LLMscited by 9
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 7.
8 papers.
- 2026EET: Experience-Driven Early Termination for Cost-Efficient Software Engineering Agentscited by 7
- 2025Agentic Software Issue Resolution with Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 6
- 2026CoACT: Action-Preserving Observation Compression for Coding Agentscited by 4
- 2026The Devil Is in the Interface: Evaluating How Tool Architecture Shapes Coding Agent Behaviorcited by 3
- 2026SEA-TS: Self-Evolving Agent for Autonomous Code Generation of Time Series Forecasting Algorithmscited by 2
- 2026The Best Programming Language for Tokenmaxxing: An Investigation of Coding Agent Behavior Across Programming Languagescited by 1
- 2026RSI-Router: Evolving Subtask-Level LLM Routing and Skills for Cost-Efficient Agentscited by 1
- 2026Analyzing and Mitigating Cost-Inefficient Behaviors in Coding Agentscited by 0
- 2026RSI-Router: Evolving Subtask-Level LLM Routing and Skills for Cost-Efficient Agents28 Sep 2026
- 2026Analyzing and Mitigating Cost-Inefficient Behaviors in Coding Agents25 Sep 2026
- 2026The Devil Is in the Interface: Evaluating How Tool Architecture Shapes Coding Agent Behavior11 Aug 2026
- 2026The Best Programming Language for Tokenmaxxing: An Investigation of Coding Agent Behavior Across Programming Languages24 Jul 2026
- 2026CoACT: Action-Preserving Observation Compression for Coding Agents3 Jul 2026
- 2026SEA-TS: Self-Evolving Agent for Autonomous Code Generation of Time Series Forecasting Algorithms5 Mar 2026
- 2026EET: Experience-Driven Early Termination for Cost-Efficient Software Engineering Agents9 Jan 2026
- 2025Agentic Software Issue Resolution with Large Language Models: A Survey24 Dec 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026TurnCost: Turns, Not Observations: Cache-Aware Loop Engineering for Coding Agents
- 2026EvoCode-Bench: Evaluating Coding Agents in Multi-Turn Iterative Interactions
- 2026LoopsBench: From Harness Engineering to Loop Engineering in Coding Agent Evaluation
- 2026Inside the Scaffold: A Source-Code Taxonomy of Coding Agent Architectures
- 2026An Empirical Cost Attribution of Context-Compression Gateways in Multi-Turn Coding Agents
- 2026Beyond Resolution Rates: Behavioral Drivers of Coding Agent Success and Failure
- 2026SWE-Duel: Towards a Self-Scaling Arena for Coding Agents
- 2026MTAC-IFBench: Benchmarking Instruction-Following in Multi-Turn Agentic Coding