Early-Stage Prediction of Review Effort in AI-Generated Pull Requests
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
As AI coding agents evolve from autocomplete tools to autonomous "AI workforce" teammates, they introduce a critical new bottleneck: human maintainers must now manage complex interaction loops rather than just reviewing code. Analyzing 33,707 agent-authored PRs, we uncover a stark two-regime reality: agents excel at narrow automation (28.3% of PRs merge instantly), but frequently fail at iterative refinement, leading to "ghosting" (abandonment) when faced with subjective feedback. This creates a hidden "attention tax" on maintainers. We introduce a creation-time Circuit Breaker model to predict high-maintenance PRs before human review begins. By leveraging simple static complexity cues (e.g., file types, patch size), our model identifies the "expensive tail" of contributions with AUC 0.96, enabling a gated triage process. At a 20% review budget, this approach captures 69% of the high-effort PRs, effectively allowing maintainers to fast-fail costly, low-quality agent contributions while fast-tracking simple fixes.
Key facts. Cited by 3 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. First posted on arXiv 2 Jan 2026.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026To What Extent Does Agent-generated Code Require Maintenance? An Empirical Studycited by 2
- 2026Augmentation with Dilution: A Large-Scale Empirical Study of Human Contributor Ecosystems After AI Coding Agent Adoptioncited by 0
- 2026Do These Violent Delights Have Violent Ends? Measuring the Post-Merge Fate of Agentic Codecited by 0
- 2026Do These Violent Delights Have Violent Ends? Measuring the Post-Merge Fate of Agentic Code10 Jul 2026
- 2026Augmentation with Dilution: A Large-Scale Empirical Study of Human Contributor Ecosystems After AI Coding Agent Adoption24 Jun 2026
- 2026To What Extent Does Agent-generated Code Require Maintenance? An Empirical Study7 May 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Predicting Acceptance and Review Effort in Human and Agent Pull Requests
- 2026How AI Coding Agents Communicate: A Study of Pull Request Description Characteristics and Human Review Responses
- 2026Humans Integrate, Agents Fix: How Agent-Authored Pull Requests Are Referenced in Practice
- 2026These Aren't the Reviews You're Looking For How Humans Review AI-Generated Pull Requests
- 2026From Human-Centric to Agentic Code Review: The Impact of Different Generations of Generative AI Technology on Review Quality
- 2026When AI Teammates Meet Code Review: Collaboration Signals Shaping the Integration of Agent-Authored Pull Requests
- 2026Let's Make Every Pull Request Meaningful: An Empirical Analysis of Developer and Agentic Pull Requests
- 2026Investigating Autonomous Agent Contributions in the Wild: Activity Patterns and Code Change over Time