Evaluating LLM-Based 0-to-1 Software Generation in End-to-End CLI Tool Scenarios
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The evolution of Large Language Models (LLMs) has catalyzed a paradigm shift towards intent-driven software development, where autonomous agents are expected to design and deliver complete, runnable software systems from scratch. However, existing benchmarks fail to adequately assess this 0-to-1 generation capability due to two fundamental limitations. First, they rely on predefined structural scaffolds, which reduces the task to mere file-filling. Second, they depend on rigid white-box unit testing, which forces generated code to conform to specific internal implementations rather than validating end-to-end user-centric behavior. To bridge this gap, we introduce CLI-Tool-Bench, a novel, structure-agnostic benchmark designed to evaluate the ground-up generation of Command-Line Interface (CLI) tools. Powered by an automated black-box differential testing framework, the benchmark comprises 94 high-quality, real-world repositories spanning diverse programming languages and complexity levels. For each task, agents are provided with an empty workspace, forcing them to autonomously handle repository planning and dependencies. We evaluate the generated software by executing it in isolated sandboxes. The system-level side effects and terminal outputs are then compared against human-written oracles using a rigorous multi-tiered equivalence metric. Extensive evaluation of seven state-of-the-art LLMs reveals that the top-tier models achieve a maximum overall success rate of only 43.8%, highlighting that 0-to-1 software generation remains a highly challenging frontier. Furthermore, we discover that agents exhibit a strong tendency to generate monolithic code structures, and that higher token consumption does not necessarily yield better task performance.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Apr 2026.
Builds on
25 of 32 references.
References · 25
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 1,906
- 2023MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Frameworkcited by 1,761
- 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineeringcited by 1,628
- 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,384
- 2024OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environmentscited by 1,134
- 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agentscited by 956
- 2023ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Developmentcited by 893
- 2024A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 646
- 2024BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructionscited by 527
13 more
- 2026Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line Interfacescited by 515
- 2024AutoCodeRover: Autonomous Program Improvementcited by 272
- 2024RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repaircited by 225
- 2024Large Language Model-Based Agents for Software Engineering: A Surveycited by 173
- 2024CodeR: Issue Resolving with Multi-Agent and Task Graphscited by 89
- 2024AutoAct: Automatic Agent Learning from Scratch for QA via Self-Planningcited by 81
- 2023RCAgent: Cloud Root Cause Analysis by Autonomous Agents with Tool-Augmented Large Language Modelscited by 62
- 2025NL2Repo-Bench: Towards Long-Horizon Repository Generation Evaluation of Coding Agentscited by 56
- 2024Commit0: Library Generation from Scratchcited by 50
- 2024A Survey on Evaluating Large Language Models in Code Generation Taskscited by 43
- 2023Advancing Requirements Engineering through Generative AI: Assessing the Role of LLMscited by 42
- 2024Multi-role Consensus through LLMs Discussions for Vulnerability Detectioncited by 19
- 2025Vibe Coding as a Reconfiguration of Intent Mediation in Software Development: Definition, Implications, and Research Agendacited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026The Productivity-Reliability Paradox: Specification-Driven Governance for AI-Augmented Software Developmentcited by 3
- 2026SWE-NFI: Studying and Benchmarking Coding Agents for Non-Functional Improvementscited by 0
- 2026Terminal Agents: A Survey of AI Agents in Command-Line Environmentscited by 0
- 2026Can Agents Design Libraries for Agents?cited by 0
- 2026E2E-SWE: Benchmarking LLMs on Building Working Codebases from Scratchcited by 0
- 2026E2E-SWE: Benchmarking LLMs on Building Working Codebases from Scratch29 Sep 2026
- 2026Can Agents Design Libraries for Agents?29 Sep 2026
- 2026Terminal Agents: A Survey of AI Agents in Command-Line Environments20 Aug 2026
- 2026SWE-NFI: Studying and Benchmarking Coding Agents for Non-Functional Improvements29 Jul 2026
- 2026The Productivity-Reliability Paradox: Specification-Driven Governance for AI-Augmented Software Development1 May 2026