AgentSZZ: Teaching the LLM Agent to Play Detective with Bug-Inducing Commits
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
The SZZ algorithm is the dominant technique for identifying bug-inducing commits and underpins many software engineering tasks, such as defect prediction and vulnerability analysis. Despite numerous variants, including recent LLM-based approaches, performance remains limited on developer-annotated datasets (e.g., recall of 0.552 on the Linux kernel). A key limitation is the reliance on git blame, which traces line-level changes within the same file, failing in common scenarios such as ghost and cross-file cases-making nearly one-quarter of bug-inducing commits inherently untraceable. Moreover, current approaches follow fixed pipelines that restrict iterative reasoning and exploration, unlike developers who investigate bugs through an interactive, multi-tool process. To address these challenges, we propose AgentSZZ, an agent-based framework that leverages LLM-driven agents to explore repositories and identify bug-inducing commits. Unlike prior methods, AgentSZZ integrates task-specific tools, domain knowledge, and a ReAct-style loop to enable adaptive and causal tracing of bugs. A structured compression module further improves efficiency by reducing redundant context while preserving key evidence. Extensive experiments on three widely used datasets show that AgentSZZ consistently outperforms state-of-the-art SZZ algorithms across all settings, achieving F1-score gains of up to 27.2% over prior LLM-based approaches. The improvements are especially pronounced in challenging scenarios such as cross-file and ghost commits, with recall gains of up to 300% and 60%, respectively. Ablation studies show that task-specific tools and domain knowledge are critical, while compression tool outputs reduce token consumption by over 30% with negligible impact. The replication package is available.
Key facts. Cited by 2 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 10 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Apr 2026.
Builds on
10 of 43 references.
Closest ancestors · 4
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Process-Centric Analysis of Agentic Software Systems2 Dec
- 2024Large Language Model-Based Agents for Software Engineering: A Survey4 Sep
- 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agents23 Jul
- 2024Executable Code Actions Elicit Better LLM Agents1 Feb
Other references · 6
- 2023The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Surveycited by 1,422
- 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,286
- 2026Kimi K2.5: Visual Agentic Intelligencecited by 449
- 2023RepoCoder: Repository-Level Code Completion Through Iterative Retrieval and Generationcited by 357
- 2017RefDiff: Detecting Refactorings in Version Historiescited by 5
- 2021Evaluating SZZ Implementations Through a Developer-informed Oraclecited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026AgenticSZZ: Temporal Knowledge Graph-Guided Agentic Bug-Inducing Commit Identification
- 2026MAS-SZZ: Multi-Agentic SZZ Algorithm for Vulnerability-Inducing Commit Identification ↗
- 2026LLM-Based Agents for Identifying Bug-Introducing Commits
- 2026Detecting Vulnerability-Inducing Commits via Multi-Stage Reasoning with LLM-Based Agents
- 2025RepoAudit: An Autonomous LLM-Agent for Repository-Level Code Auditing
- 2025Benchmarking LLMs and LLM-based Agents in Practical Vulnerability Detection for Code Repositories
- 2026Favia: Forensic Agent for Vulnerability-fix Identification and Analysis
- 2025LLM-Based Detection of Tangled Code Changes for Higher-Quality Method-Level Bug Datasets