# Diagnosis-Driven Automatic Repair for Agentic Workflow via Symbolic Inference

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.02882 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.02882/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 45 of its 50 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 3 Jul 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, 30 of 45)

- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.08155/) (2023)
- [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)
- [HuggingGPT: Solving AI Tasks with ChatGPT and its Friends in Hugging Face](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17580/) (2023)
- [ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.07924/) (2023)
- [Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.13657/) (2025)
- [Plan-and-Solve Prompting: Improving Zero-Shot Chain-of-Thought Reasoning by Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04091/) (2023)
- [GEPA: Reflective Prompt Evolution Can Outperform Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.19457/) (2025)
- [RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repair](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.17134/) (2024)
- [Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.00212/) (2025)
- [Where LLM Agents Fail and How They can Learn From Failures](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.25370/) (2025)
- [AgenTracer: Who Is Inducing Failure in the LLM Agentic Systems?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.03312/) (2025)
- [TRAIL: Trace Reasoning and Agentic Issue Localization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.08638/) (2025)
- [Understanding Software Engineering Agents: A Study of Thought-Action-Result Trajectories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.18824/) (2025)
- [Reducing Cost of LLM Agents with Trajectory Reduction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.23586/) (2025)
- [Automatic Programming: Large Language Models and Beyond](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.02213/) (2024)
- [Who is Introducing the Failure? Automatically Attributing Failures of Multi-Agent Systems via Spectrum Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.13782/) (2025)
- [From Language to Action: A Review of Large Language Models as Autonomous Agents and Tool Users](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.17281/) (2025)
- [Where Did It All Go Wrong? A Hierarchical Look into Multi-Agent Error Attribution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.04886/) (2025)
- [Seeing the Whole Elephant: A Benchmark for Failure Attribution in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.22708/) (2026)
- [DoVer: Intervention-Driven Auto Debugging for LLM Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.06749/) (2025)
- [ReCreate: Reasoning and Creating Domain Agents Driven by Experience](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.11100/) (2026)
- [GraphTracer: Graph-Guided Failure Tracing in LLM Agents for Robust Multi-Turn Deep Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.10581/) (2025)
- [Aegis: Automated Error Generation and Attribution for Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.14295/) (2025)
- [RAFFLES: Reasoning-based Attribution of Faults for LLM Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.06822/) (2025)
- [Exploring Autonomous Agents: A Closer Look at Why They Fail When Completing Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.13143/) (2025)
- [Failure-Driven Workflow Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.10035/) (2025)
- [SCOPE: Prompt Evolution for Enhancing Agent Effectiveness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.15374/) (2025)
- [CORRECT: COndensed eRror RECognition via knowledge Transfer in multi-agent systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.24088/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Platform-orchestrated agentic workflows have become a popular paradigm for developing LLM-based applications. However, their reliability remains a major challenge due to the uncertainty of LLM outputs, complex inter-node dependencies, and heterogeneous tool interactions. Existing agentic workflow optimization and agent enhancement methods primarily rely on trajectory-level feedback. Without explicitly identifying the underlying failure root causes, their resulting repair plans are often insufficiently targeted. We propose FlowFixer, a diagnosis-driven automated repair framework for agentic workflows. FlowFixer first transforms workflow executions into unified symbolic traces and performs symbolic inference to derive executable behavioral specifications that capture node correctness, temporal dependencies, and causal relationships. Based on specification verification, it conducts failure attribution and root cause analysis, and then generates targeted repair patches. To reduce verification costs, FlowFixer further employs a multi-dimensional pre-execution assessment to filter infeasible repairs before dynamic verification. We evaluate FlowFixer on workflow failures collected from three popular development platforms: Dify, Coze and n8n. Results show that FlowFixer achieves a repair success rate of 71.3%, outperforming state-of-the-art baselines by 11.9% to 27.6%. It also improves failure attribution accuracy by 4.8% to 33.1% and root cause analysis accuracy by 15.3% to 38.8%. This work offers a new perspective on reliable diagnosis and repair of agentic workflows through symbolic modeling and inference.