# Evaluating LLM-Based 0-to-1 Software Generation in End-to-End CLI Tool Scenarios

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.06742 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.06742/

## Key facts

- Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 25 of its 32 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Apr 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07974/) (2024)
- [MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.00352/) (2023)
- [SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.15793/) (2024)
- [A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15594/) (2024)
- [OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.07972/) (2024)
- [OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.16741/) (2024)
- [ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.07924/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.00515/) (2024)
- [Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line Interfaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.11868/) (2026)
- [BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.15877/) (2024)
- [AutoCodeRover: Autonomous Program Improvement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.05427/) (2024)
- [RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repair](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.17134/) (2024)
- [Large Language Model-Based Agents for Software Engineering: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.02977/) (2024)
- [CodeR: Issue Resolving with Multi-Agent and Task Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01304/) (2024)
- [AutoAct: Automatic Agent Learning from Scratch for QA via Self-Planning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.05268/) (2024)
- [RCAgent: Cloud Root Cause Analysis by Autonomous Agents with Tool-Augmented Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.16340/) (2023)
- [NL2Repo-Bench: Towards Long-Horizon Repository Generation Evaluation of Coding Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.12730/) (2025)
- [Commit0: Library Generation from Scratch](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.01769/) (2024)
- [A Survey on Evaluating Large Language Models in Code Generation Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.16498/) (2024)
- [Advancing Requirements Engineering through Generative AI: Assessing the Role of LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13976/) (2023)
- [Multi-role Consensus through LLMs Discussions for Vulnerability Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.14274/) (2024)
- [Vibe Coding as a Reconfiguration of Intent Mediation in Software Development: Definition, Implications, and Research Agenda](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.21928/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [The Productivity-Reliability Paradox: Specification-Driven Governance for AI-Augmented Software Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.01160/) (2026)
- [SWE-NFI: Studying and Benchmarking Coding Agents for Non-Functional Improvements](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.27409/) (2026)
- [Terminal Agents: A Survey of AI Agents in Command-Line Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.20485/) (2026)
- [Can Agents Design Libraries for Agents?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.36730/) (2026)
- [E2E-SWE: Benchmarking LLMs on Building Working Codebases from Scratch](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.38335/) (2026)

## 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.