From Assistance to Agency: Rethinking Autonomy and Control in CI/CD Pipelines
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance
Abstract (arXiv)
AI agents are assuming active roles in Continuous Integration and Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) workflows, yet the research community lacks a shared vocabulary for describing what it means for CI/CD to be agentic, how much decision authority is delegated, and where control should reside. This paper presents a vision of agentic CI/CD in which the central challenge is not improving task performance but designing authority transfer, defined as the delegation of operational decisions from human-controlled pipelines to agent systems under specified constraints and recourse mechanisms. To structure this argument, we introduce a distinction between data-plane authority (localized interventions such as patch generation and test reruns) and control-plane authority (modifications to pipeline configuration, deployment policies, and approval gates). Drawing on research prototypes and industrial platforms, we show that current systems operate mainly at the data plane under bounded autonomy, with safety achieved through surrounding governance infrastructure rather than intrinsic agent guarantees. We identify three recurring patterns: constrained autonomy as the dominant design, external governance as the primary safety mechanism, and a widening gap between deployment momentum and evaluation methodology. We propose a research agenda in which control-plane safety and governance mechanisms represent the most urgent open problem, followed by formalization of autonomy boundaries, evaluation frameworks, and human--agent coordination.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 14 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 May 2026.
Builds on
14 of 38 references.
References · 14
- 2023Large Language Models for Software Engineering: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 399
- 2024RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repaircited by 232
- 2024Large Language Model-Based Agents for Software Engineering: A Surveycited by 178
- 2023Keep the Conversation Going: Fixing 162 out of 337 bugs for 0.42 each using ChatGPTcited by 125
- 2024Agents in Software Engineering: Survey, Landscape, and Visioncited by 60
- 2024You Name It, I Run It: An LLM Agent to Execute Tests of Arbitrary Projectscited by 47
- 2017Continuous Integration, Delivery and Deployment: A Systematic Review on Approaches, Tools, Challenges and Practicescited by 22
- 2026AIDev: Studying AI Coding Agents on GitHubcited by 17
- 2018How to Design a Program Repair Bot? Insights from the Repairnator Projectcited by 11
- 2025LogSage: An LLM-Based Framework for CI/CD Failure Detection and Remediation with Industrial Validationcited by 6
- 2019Repairnator patches programs automaticallycited by 3
- 2025Understanding the Challenges and Opportunities of Generative AI Apps: An Empirical Studycited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025AI-Augmented CI/CD Pipelines: From Code Commit to Production with Autonomous Decisions
- 2026The CASE Framework: A Multi-Disciplinary Control Architecture for Governing Enterprise Agentic AI
- 2026OpenAgentFlow: Enabling System-Wide Safety Boundaries for Heterogeneous AI Agent Fleets
- 2026Autonomy and Agency in Agentic AI: Architectural Tactics for Regulated Contexts
- 2026A pragmatic approach to regulating AI agents
- 2026Separating Capability from Permission: A Governance Framework for Agentic AI Autonomy Levels
- 2026Institutional AI: A Governance Framework for Distributional AGI Safety
- 2025A Practical Guide for Designing, Developing, and Deploying Production-Grade Agentic AI Workflows