# Beyond Functional Correctness: Design Issues in AI IDE-Generated Large-Scale Projects

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.06373 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.06373/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 12 of its 70 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 7 Apr 2026.

## Placed in

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Measuring the Impact of Early-2025 AI on Experienced Open-Source Developer Productivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.09089/) (2025)
- [Is ChatGPT the Ultimate Programming Assistant -- How far is it?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.11938/) (2023)
- [Speed at the Cost of Quality: How Cursor AI Increases Short-Term Velocity and Long-Term Complexity in Open-Source Projects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.04427/) (2025)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Code Generation: A Survey with Focus on Repository-Level Approaches](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.04905/) (2025)
- [CodePori: Large-Scale System for Autonomous Software Development Using Multi-Agent Technology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01411/) (2024)
- [ProjDevBench: Benchmarking AI Coding Agents on End-to-End Project Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.01655/) (2026)
- [The Rise of AI Teammates in Software Engineering (SE) 3.0: How Autonomous Coding Agents Are Reshaping Software Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.15003/) (2025)
- [Assessing the Quality and Security of AI-Generated Code: A Quantitative Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.14727/) (2025)
- [Automatically Generating Web Applications from Requirements Via Multi-Agent Test-Driven Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.25297/) (2025)
- [More Code, Less Reuse: Investigating Code Quality and Reviewer Sentiment towards AI-generated Pull Requests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.21276/) (2026)
- [CodeAssistBench (CAB): Dataset & Benchmarking for Multi-turn Chat-Based Code Assistance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.10646/) (2025)
- [Where Is Self-admitted Code Generated by Large Language Models on GitHub?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.19544/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Rule Taxonomy and Evolution in AI IDEs: A Mining and Survey Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.12231/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

New generation of AI coding tools, including AI-powered IDEs equipped with agentic capabilities, can generate code within the context of the project. These AI IDEs are increasingly perceived as capable of producing project-level code at scale. However, there is limited empirical evidence on the extent to which they can generate large-scale software systems and what design issues such systems may exhibit. To address this gap, we conducted a study to explore the capability of Cursor in generating large-scale projects and to evaluate the design quality of projects generated by Cursor. First, we propose a Feature-Driven Human-In-The-Loop (FD-HITL) framework that systematically guides project generation from curated project descriptions. We generated 10 projects using Cursor with the FD-HITL framework across three application domains and multiple technologies. We assessed the functional correctness of these projects through manual evaluation, obtaining an average functional correctness score of 91%. Next, we analyzed the generated projects using two static analysis tools, CodeScene and SonarQube, to detect design issues. We identified 1,305 design issues categorized into 9 categories by CodeScene and 3,193 issues in 11 categories by SonarQube. Our findings show that (1) when used with the FD-HITL framework, Cursor can generate functional large-scale projects averaging 16,965 LoC and 114 files; (2) the generated projects nevertheless contain design issues that may pose long-term maintainability and evolvability risks, requiring careful review by experienced developers; (3) the most prevalent issues include Code Duplication, high Code Complexity, Large Methods, Framework Best-Practice Violations, Exception-Handling Issues and Accessibility Issues; (4) these design issues violate design principles such as SRP, SoC, and DRY. The replication package is at https://github.com/Kashifraz/DIinAGP