mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

TraceCoder: A Trace-Driven Multi-Agent Framework for Automated Debugging of LLM-Generated Code

arXiv 2602.06875 ↗First posted 6 Feb 2026cs.SE cs.AIcited by 6

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) often generate code with subtle but critical bugs, especially for complex tasks. Existing automated repair methods typically rely on superficial pass/fail signals, offering limited visibility into program behavior and hindering precise error localization. In addition, without a way to learn from prior failures, repair processes often fall into repetitive and inefficient cycles. To overcome these challenges, we present TraceCoder, a collaborative multi-agent framework that emulates the observe-analyze-repair process of human experts. The framework first instruments the code with diagnostic probes to capture fine-grained runtime traces, enabling deep insight into its internal execution. It then conducts causal analysis on these traces to accurately identify the root cause of the failure. This process is further enhanced by a novel Historical Lesson Learning Mechanism (HLLM), which distills insights from prior failed repair attempts to inform subsequent correction strategies and prevent recurrence of similar mistakes. To ensure stable convergence, a Rollback Mechanism enforces that each repair iteration constitutes a strict improvement toward the correct solution. Comprehensive experiments across multiple benchmarks show that TraceCoder achieves up to a 34.43% relative improvement in Pass@1 accuracy over existing advanced baselines. Ablation studies verify the significance of each system component, with the iterative repair process alone contributing a 65.61% relative gain in accuracy. Furthermore, TraceCoder significantly outperforms leading iterative methods in terms of both accuracy and cost-efficiency.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 31 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Feb 2026.

Builds on

31 of 53 references.

Closest ancestors · 4

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Evaluating Software Development Agents: Patch Patterns, Code Quality, and Issue Complexity in Real-World GitHub Scenarios16 Oct
  2. 2024UniDebugger: Hierarchical Multi-Agent Framework for Unified Software Debugging26 Apr
  3. 2024RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repair25 Mar
  4. 2023Self-collaboration Code Generation via ChatGPT15 Apr

Other references · 27

  1. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  2. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  3. 2024Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of contextcited by 3,175
  4. 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,203
  5. 2023Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Codecited by 2,105
  6. 2023Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 1,332
  7. 2023Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debugcited by 963
  8. 2023Planning with Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 179
  9. 2023Self-planning Code Generation with Large Language Modelscited by 121
  10. 2024DA-Code: Agent Data Science Code Generation Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 57
  11. 2023A Survey of Learning-based Automated Program Repaircited by 55
  12. 2024AutoVerus: Automated Proof Generation for Rust Codecited by 46
15 more
  1. 2024A Deep Dive into Large Language Models for Automated Bug Localization and Repaircited by 39
  2. 2024Agent-Oriented Planning in Multi-Agent Systemscited by 34
  3. 2024Test-Driven Development for Code Generationcited by 32
  4. 2025Creativity in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems: A Surveycited by 23
  5. 2024ThinkRepair: Self-Directed Automated Program Repaircited by 22
  6. 2025Emergent Coordination in Multi-Agent Language Modelscited by 22
  7. 2024Analyzing the Performance of Large Language Models on Code Summarizationcited by 19
  8. 2023INTERVENOR: Prompting the Coding Ability of Large Language Models with the Interactive Chain of Repaircited by 18
  9. 2022Assemble Foundation Models for Automatic Code Summarizationcited by 17
  10. 2024Aligning the Objective of LLM-based Program Repaircited by 12
  11. 2024Can ChatGPT Support Developers? An Empirical Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 11
  12. 2024ArchCode: Incorporating Software Requirements in Code Generation with Large Language Modelscited by 8
  13. 2023TransformCode: A Contrastive Learning Framework for Code Embedding via Subtree Transformationcited by 4
  14. 2025NL-Debugging: Exploiting Natural Language as an Intermediate Representation for Code Debuggingcited by 4
  15. 2024AMR-Evol: Adaptive Modular Response Evolution Elicits Better Knowledge Distillation for Large Language Models in Code Generationcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 6.

6 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025InspectCoder: Dynamic Analysis-Enabled Self Repair through interactive LLM-Debugger Collaboration
  2. 2025Fully Autonomous Programming using Iterative Multi-Agent Debugging with Large Language Models
  3. 2026XAI for Coding Agent Failures: Transforming Raw Execution Traces into Actionable Insights
  4. 2026Repair or Resample? Rethinking Failure Debugging in LLM Multi-Agent Systems
  5. 2024COAST: Enhancing the Code Debugging Ability of LLMs through Communicative Agent Based Data Synthesis
  6. 2025Enhancing LLM Code Generation: A Systematic Evaluation of Multi-Agent Collaboration and Runtime Debugging for Improved Accuracy, Reliability, and Latency
  7. 2026DebugHarness: Emulating Human Dynamic Debugging for Autonomous Program Repair
  8. 2025Understanding Automated Program Repair Agents Through the Lens of Traceability: An Empirical Study