mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

SWE-Review: Closing the Loop on Issue Resolution with Agentic Code Review

arXiv 2607.06065 ↗First posted 7 Jul 2026cs.SEcited by 5

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Coding agents increasingly generate pull requests (PRs) for real-world software issues, yet one-shot PR generation remains open-loop: the PR is proposed without systematic review, diagnosis, or revision. We introduce SWE-Review, a framework for closing this loop with agentic code review. Given an issue and an AI-generated PR, a reviewer agent explores the repository, decides whether the PR should be accepted, and provides structured feedback for revision. We evaluate this setting with our proposed SWE-Review-Bench to measure both review correctness and downstream revision usefulness. We further curate SWE-Review-Traj dataset to study broader applications of agentic review and fill the data-scarcity gap for open reviewer training. Experiments show that agentic review continuously improves PRs through a generate-review-revise loop, outperforms single-turn fixed-context review in both decision accuracy and resolve rate after revision, transfers beyond review to improve issue-resolution models, and enables effective and efficient test-time scaling. These results position agentic code review as a practical mechanism for moving AI coding agents from one-shot PR generation toward closed-loop issue resolution.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 28 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2026.

Builds on

28 of 47 references.

Closest ancestors · 10

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026CR-Bench: Evaluating the Real-World Utility of AI Code Review Agents10 Mar
  2. 2026GLM-5: from Vibe Coding to Agentic Engineering17 Feb
  3. 2025SWE-RM: Execution-free Feedback For Software Engineering Agents26 Dec
  4. 2025SWE-rebench: An Automated Pipeline for Task Collection and Decontaminated Evaluation of Software Engineering Agents26 May
  5. 2025SWE-smith: Scaling Data for Software Engineering Agents30 Apr
  6. 2025R2E-Gym: Procedural Environments and Hybrid Verifiers for Scaling Open-Weights SWE Agents9 Apr
  7. 2024Training Software Engineering Agents and Verifiers with SWE-Gym30 Dec
  8. 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agents23 Jul
  9. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering6 May
  10. 2024CodeAgent: Autonomous Communicative Agents for Code Review3 Feb

Other references · 18

  1. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
  2. 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,442
  3. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
  4. 2024Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameterscited by 1,986
  5. 2025SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?cited by 279
  6. 2024Generative Reward Modelscited by 148
  7. 2023Learning From Mistakes Makes LLM Better Reasonercited by 101
  8. 2025SWE-bench Goes Live!cited by 80
  9. 2025Critique Fine-Tuning: Learning to Critique is More Effective than Learning to Imitatecited by 63
  10. 2021Towards Automating Code Review Activitiescited by 54
  11. 2023LLaMA-Reviewer: Advancing Code Review Automation with Large Language Models through Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuningcited by 47
  12. 2026SWE-Lego: Pushing the Limits of Supervised Fine-tuning for Software Issue Resolvingcited by 31
6 more
  1. 2022AUGER: Automatically Generating Review Comments with Pre-training Modelscited by 23
  2. 2025BitsAI-CR: Automated Code Review via LLM in Practicecited by 22
  3. 2024CRScore: Grounding Automated Evaluation of Code Review Comments in Code Claims and Smellscited by 8
  4. 2025CodeFuse-CR-Bench: A Comprehensiveness-aware Benchmark for End-to-End Code Review Evaluation in Python Projectscited by 5
  5. 2026AACR-Bench: Evaluating Automatic Code Review with Holistic Repository-Level Contextcited by 5
  6. 2024Impact of LLM-based Review Comment Generation in Practice: A Mixed Open-/Closed-source User Studycited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.

5 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Is Agentic Code Review Helpful? Mining Developers' Feedback to CodeRabbit Reviews in the Wild
  2. 2025Issue-Oriented Agent-Based Framework for Automated Review Comment Generation
  3. 2026SWE-Gate: Passing Functional Tests Is Not Enough for Software Engineering Agents
  4. 2026Beyond Bug Fixes: An Empirical Investigation of Post-Merge Code Quality Issues in Agent-Generated Pull Requests
  5. 2026Why Are Agentic Pull Requests Merged or Rejected? An Empirical Study
  6. 2026From Industry Claims to Empirical Reality: An Empirical Study of Code Review Agents in Pull Requests
  7. 20263100 Opinions on Code Review in an AI World: Building Causal Theory from Practitioner Discourse
  8. 2026Agentic Code Review in the Terminal: A Trajectory-Level Analysis of Behavior, Cost, and Human-Alignment