mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Needle in the Repo: A Benchmark for Maintainability in AI-Generated Repository Edits

arXiv 2603.27745 ↗First posted 29 Mar 2026cs.SE cs.AIcited by 1

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

Abstract (arXiv)

AI coding agents can now complete complex programming tasks, but existing evaluations largely emphasize behavioral correctness and often overlook maintainability risks such as weak modularity or testability. We present Needle in the Repo (NITR), a diagnostic probe-and-oracle framework for evaluating whether behaviorally correct repository edits preserve maintainable structure. NITR distills recurring software engineering wisdom into controlled probes embedded in small, realistic multi-file codebases, each designed so that success depends primarily on one targeted maintainability dimension. Each probe is paired with a hidden evaluation harness that combines functional tests for required behavior with structural oracles that encode the targeted maintainability constraint and return interpretable diagnoses. Using NITR, we evaluate 23 coding configurations across GPT, Claude, Gemini, and Qwen families in both direct-inference and agent-based settings. Current AI coding systems remain far from robust: on average, configurations solve only 36.2% of cases, the best reaches 57.1%, and performance drops from 53.5% on micro cases to 20.6% on multi-step cases. The hardest pressures are architectural rather than local edits, especially dependency control (4.3%) and responsibility decomposition (15.2%). Moreover, 64/483 outcomes (13.3%) pass all functional tests yet fail the structural oracle. Under our harness, agent-mode configurations improve average performance from 28.2% to 45.0%, but do not eliminate these architectural failures. These results show that progress in code generation is not yet progress in maintainable code evolution, and that NITR exposes a critical failure surface missed by conventional evaluation.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper 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 26 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Mar 2026.

Builds on

26 of 38 references.

Closest ancestors · 7

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026SWE-CI: Evaluating Agent Capabilities in Maintaining Codebases via Continuous Integration4 Mar
  2. 2025SWE-EVO: Benchmarking Coding Agents in Long-Horizon Software Evolution Scenarios20 Dec
  3. 2025SWE-rebench: An Automated Pipeline for Task Collection and Decontaminated Evaluation of Software Engineering Agents26 May
  4. 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agents23 Jul
  5. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering6 May
  6. 2024RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repair25 Mar
  7. 2024Executable Code Actions Elicit Better LLM Agents1 Feb

Other references · 19

  1. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  2. 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,064
  3. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
  4. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
  5. 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 1,906
  6. 2022Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCodecited by 1,427
  7. 2023RepoBench: Benchmarking Repository-Level Code Auto-Completion Systemscited by 346
  8. 2025SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?cited by 254
  9. 2024SWE-bench Multimodal: Do AI Systems Generalize to Visual Software Domains?cited by 196
  10. 2025Multi-SWE-bench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Issue Resolvingcited by 165
  11. 2024RepoGraph: Enhancing AI Software Engineering with Repository-level Code Graphcited by 88
  12. 2024EvoCodeBench: An Evolving Code Generation Benchmark Aligned with Real-World Code Repositoriescited by 71
7 more
  1. 2024Beyond Correctness: Benchmarking Multi-dimensional Code Generation for Large Language Modelscited by 9
  2. 2025LAURA: Enhancing Code Review Generation with Context-Enriched Retrieval-Augmented LLMcited by 8
  3. 2026SWE-Milestone: Evaluating AI Agents on Continuous Software Evolutioncited by 6
  4. 2025Automated Code Review Using Large Language Models at Ericsson: An Experience Reportcited by 5
  5. 2025Is LLM-Generated Code More Maintainable & Reliable than Human-Written Code?cited by 5
  6. 2025Evaluating the Effectiveness of LLMs in Fixing Maintainability Issues in Real-World Projectscited by 4
  7. 2025Are We SOLID Yet? An Empirical Study on Prompting LLMs to Detect Design Principle Violationscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026A Jagged Frontier: Evaluating Robustness of Code Agents to Semantics-Preserving Transformations
  2. 2026RepoMod-Bench: A Benchmark for Code Repository Modernization via Implementation-Agnostic Testing
  3. 2025NL2Repo-Bench: Towards Long-Horizon Repository Generation Evaluation of Coding Agents
  4. 2026Large-scale Repository Engineering via Agent-Native Reusable Code Primitives
  5. 2026Can Coding Agents Solve Repository-Level Issues with Rendered Code? An Exploratory Study of Visual Representations
  6. 2026AI-Generated Smells: An Analysis of Code and Architecture in LLM and Agent-Driven Development
  7. 2026SWE-Gate: Passing Functional Tests Is Not Enough for Software Engineering Agents
  8. 2026VibeMemBench: Evaluating Memory Systems for Coding Agents on Real Repository Coding Tasks