# Trustworthy AI Software Engineers

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.06310 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.06310/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (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 6 Feb 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Software engineering coding agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/software-engineering-coding-agents/)

## Abstract (arXiv)

With the rapid rise of AI coding agents, the fundamental premise of what it means to be a software engineer is in question. In this vision paper, we examine what it means for an AI agent to be considered a software engineer and then critically think about what makes such an agent trustworthy. Grounded in established definitions of SE (SE) and informed by recent research on agentic AI systems, we conceptualise AI software engineers as participants in human-AI SE teams composed of human software engineers and AI agents, and we distinguish trustworthiness as a key property of these systems and actors rather than a subjective human attitude. Extending on historical perspectives and emerging visions, we identify key dimensions that contribute to the trustworthiness of AI software engineers, spanning technical quality, transparency and accountability, epistemic humility, and societal and ethical alignment. Beyond defining these dimensions, we address a critical but underexplored challenge: how trustworthiness can be operationalised in practice. We therefore introduce the notion of evidence-centric inspection, arguing that developers should evaluate selective signals and justifications of trustworthiness rather than raw outputs, and we outline implications for rethinking verification, validation, and code review in human-AI SE teams.