Wink: Recovering from Misbehaviors in Coding Agents
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Autonomous coding agents, powered by large language models (LLMs), are increasingly being adopted in the software industry to automate complex engineering tasks. However, these agents are prone to a wide range of misbehaviors, such as deviating from the user's instructions, getting stuck in repetitive loops, or failing to use tools correctly. These failures disrupt the development workflow and often require resource-intensive manual intervention. In this paper, we present a system for automatically recovering from agentic misbehaviors at scale. We first introduce a taxonomy of misbehaviors grounded in an analysis of production traffic, identifying three primary categories: Specification Drift, Reasoning Problems, and Tool Call Failures, which we find occur in about 30% of all agent trajectories. To address these issues, we developed a lightweight, asynchronous self-intervention system named Wink. Wink observes agent trajectories and provides targeted course-correction guidance to nudge the agent back to a productive path. We evaluated our system on over 10,000 real world agent trajectories and found that it successfully resolves 90% of the misbehaviors that require a single intervention. Furthermore, a live A/B test in our production environment demonstrated that our system leads to a statistically significant reduction in Tool Call Failures, Tokens per Session and Engineer Interventions per Session. We present our experience designing and deploying this system, offering insights into the challenges of building resilient agentic systems at scale.
Key facts. Cited by 11 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 21 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Feb 2026.
Builds on
21 of 29 references.
Closest ancestors · 12
Same direction, newest first
- 2026AgentRx: Diagnosing AI Agent Failures from Execution Trajectories2 Feb
- 2026Where Do AI Coding Agents Fail? An Empirical Study of Failed Agentic Pull Requests in GitHub21 Jan
- 2025VIGIL: A Reflective Runtime for Self-Healing Agents8 Dec
- 2025Understanding Code Agent Behaviour: An Empirical Study of Success and Failure Trajectories31 Oct
- 2025Where LLM Agents Fail and How They can Learn From Failures29 Sep
- 2025When Agents go Astray: Course-Correcting SWE Agents with PRMs2 Sep
- 2025Understanding Software Engineering Agents: A Study of Thought-Action-Result Trajectories23 Jun
- 2025TRAIL: Trace Reasoning and Agentic Issue Localization13 May
- 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?17 Mar
- 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agents23 Jul
- 2024RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repair25 Mar
- 2023ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Development16 Jul
Other references · 9
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
- 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,384
- 2023Large Language Models for Software Engineering: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 389
- 2024AutoCodeRover: Autonomous Program Improvementcited by 272
- 2025AgentSpec: Customizable Runtime Enforcement for Safe and Reliable LLM Agentscited by 196
- 2023Large Language Models for Software Engineering: Survey and Open Problemscited by 178
- 2025Process Reward Models for LLM Agents: Practical Framework and Directionscited by 81
- 2025AgentPRM: Process Reward Models for LLM Agents via Step-Wise Promise and Progresscited by 69
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 11.
11 papers.
- 2026From Failed Trajectories to Reliable LLM Agents: Diagnosing and Repairing Harness Flawscited by 21
- 2026From Question Answering to Task Completion: A Survey on Agent System and Harness Designcited by 9
- 2026OpenClawBench: Benchmarking Process-side Anomalies in Real-world Agent Execution Trajectoriescited by 4
- 2026Fail-Fast, Restart-Smart: Early Failure Prediction and Restart for SWE Agentic Taskscited by 3
- 2026TraceView: Interactive Visualization of Agentic Program Repair Trajectoriescited by 2
- 2026What Do Agents Communicate? Characterizing Information Exchange in Multi-Agent Systemscited by 1
- 2026Insights Generator: Systematic Corpus-Level Trace Diagnostics for LLM Agentscited by 1
- 2026Online Monitoring and Corrective Steering of Programming Agentscited by 1
- 2026From Code Review to Code Critique: Intent, Drift, and Spotlight for AI-Generated Diffs at Scalecited by 0
- 2026Towards Risk-free AI Agent Deploymentcited by 0
- 2026What Can Component-Replacement Evidence Establish? A Critical Scoping Review of Local Decisions in LLM Agentscited by 0
- 2026What Can Component-Replacement Evidence Establish? A Critical Scoping Review of Local Decisions in LLM Agents30 Sep 2026
- 2026Towards Risk-free AI Agent Deployment17 Aug 2026
- 2026Online Monitoring and Corrective Steering of Programming Agents7 Aug 2026
- 2026Fail-Fast, Restart-Smart: Early Failure Prediction and Restart for SWE Agentic Tasks4 Aug 2026
- 2026From Code Review to Code Critique: Intent, Drift, and Spotlight for AI-Generated Diffs at Scale31 Jul 2026
- 2026TraceView: Interactive Visualization of Agentic Program Repair Trajectories20 Jun 2026
- 2026From Question Answering to Task Completion: A Survey on Agent System and Harness Design14 Jun 2026
- 2026From Failed Trajectories to Reliable LLM Agents: Diagnosing and Repairing Harness Flaws4 Jun 2026
- 2026OpenClawBench: Benchmarking Process-side Anomalies in Real-world Agent Execution Trajectories28 May 2026
- 2026Insights Generator: Systematic Corpus-Level Trace Diagnostics for LLM Agents20 May 2026
- 2026What Do Agents Communicate? Characterizing Information Exchange in Multi-Agent Systems19 May 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Beyond Resolution Rates: Behavioral Drivers of Coding Agent Success and Failure
- 2026Code as Agent Harness
- 2026ClayBuddy: A Framework, Evaluation, & Mitigation of Coding Agent Failures
- 2026Self-Improving AI Coding Agents Through Accumulated Behavioral Rules: A Closed-Loop Framework
- 2026Inside the Scaffold: A Source-Code Taxonomy of Coding Agent Architectures
- 2026TACT: Mitigating Overthinking and Overacting in Coding Agents via Activation Steering
- 2026TRIM: Reducing AI-Generated CodeSlop via Agent Trajectory Minimization
- 2025AI Agentic Programming: A Survey of Techniques, Challenges, and Opportunities