mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Knowledge-Based Pull Requests: A Trusted Workflow for Agent-Mediated Knowledge Collaboration

arXiv 2606.26721 ↗First posted 25 Jun 2026cs.SE cs.HCcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

AI coding agents are changing the bottleneck in software collaboration: code is increasingly cheap, while understanding intent, negotiating scope, and governing long-term project responsibility remain costly. This paper proposes Knowledge-Based Pull Requests (KPR), a trusted workflow for agent-mediated software collaboration across trust boundaries, including open source, enterprise, vendor, contractor, and customer-driven settings. In KPR, an external collaborator's local code, tests, and cleaned agent interaction trace are treated as knowledge sources rather than as the default merge candidate. Agents distill these sources into a human-confirmed knowledge package and render it into reviewer-facing forms such as design memos, risk checklists, test plans, or implementation briefs. A project-owned inner trusted coding agent then regenerates candidate code inside the receiving project's environment under repository context, engineering conventions, tests, and security policy. KPR therefore separates two decisions that traditional pull requests often collapse: whether the knowledge should enter the project, and whether a particular implementation should be merged. We contribute the KPR workflow, a candidate artifact schema, a cost-accounting view, a collaboration gateway architecture, a minimal controlled simulation pilot over seven merged public pull requests, and an evaluation agenda. The pilot shows that KPR packages can be instantiated from real PR material and stress-tested under description ablation, diff ablation, and synthetic poisoned-patch conditions. We position KPR as an empirically testable workflow: its value depends on whether auditable extraction, transformation, and project-side regeneration reduce the cost of understanding and reworking high-context external changes.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. First posted on arXiv 25 Jun 2026.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025On the Use of Agentic Coding: An Empirical Study of Pull Requests on GitHub
  2. 2026A Task-Level Evaluation of AI Agents in Open-Source Projects
  3. 2026Humans Integrate, Agents Fix: How Agent-Authored Pull Requests Are Referenced in Practice
  4. 2026Where Do AI Coding Agents Fail? An Empirical Study of Failed Agentic Pull Requests in GitHub
  5. 2026On Autopilot? An Empirical Study of Human-AI Teaming and Review Practices in Open Source
  6. 2026Security in the Age of AI Teammates: An Empirical Study of Agentic Pull Requests on GitHub
  7. 2026Why Are AI Agent Involved Pull Requests (Fix-Related) Remain Unmerged? An Empirical Study
  8. 2026Investigating Autonomous Agent Contributions in the Wild: Activity Patterns and Code Change over Time