mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Can your AI agent be cheaper? Investigating the effects of task specifications on token spend in agentic coding tasks

arXiv 2608.25399 ↗First posted 26 Aug 2026cs.AIcited by 1

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent memory systems

Abstract (arXiv)

Agentic coding workflows are now widely deployed in real-world systems. With long-horizon reasoning and tool use, token usage has become an important consideration for both cost and efficiency. Two engineers using AI will solve the same problem differently. How the specification of a task shapes an agent's token spend, and whether that spend can be predicted in advance, are open questions. Here, we study the effects of different task specifications on agentic token spend with the Kimi K3 model at three thinking efforts. Across 2,700 runs, we show that reducing a full task specification to a bare user story raises token spend by 29.7%, while run-to-run variance remains unaffected by any prompt changes. We show that prompt-sensitivity is task-dependent, running from 13% to 115%. We fit a simple predictor that can price a full distribution of task specifications and thinking effort configurations from a single cheap probe on an unseen task within 36%, improving over prior work in predicting token spend. Our work provides initial results quantifying the effects of task specification on agentic token spend and introduces a method that can be used to systematically evaluate the cost of AI coding workflows.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent memory systems, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 18 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Aug 2026.

Builds on

18 of 22 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026How Do AI Agents Spend Your Money? Analyzing and Predicting Token Consumption in Agentic Coding Tasks24 Apr

Other references · 17

  1. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
  2. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineeringcited by 1,628
  3. 2024Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agentscited by 400
  4. 2025SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?cited by 254
  5. 2024AI Agents That Mattercited by 199
  6. 2024Efficient multi-prompt evaluation of LLMscited by 72
  7. 2026SWE-Skills-Bench: Do Agent Skills Actually Help in Real-World Software Engineering?cited by 72
  8. 2025SelfBudgeter: Adaptive Token Allocation for Efficient LLM Reasoningcited by 47
  9. 2025OptimalThinkingBench: Evaluating Over and Underthinking in LLMscited by 35
  10. 2025Reasoning on a Budget: A Survey of Adaptive and Controllable Test-Time Compute in LLMscited by 31
  11. 2025Ambig-SWE: Interactive Agents to Overcome Underspecificity in Software Engineeringcited by 28
  12. 2026Value of Information: A Framework for Human-Agent Communicationcited by 10
5 more
  1. 2026Adaptive Test-Time Compute Allocation for Reasoning LLMs via Constrained Policy Optimizationcited by 8
  2. 2026ClarEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Clarification Skills of Code Agents under Ambiguous Instructionscited by 5
  3. 2026When Prompt Under-Specification Improves Code Correctness: An Exploratory Study of Prompt Wording and Structure Effects on LLM-Based Code Generationcited by 3
  4. 2025Re-Evaluating Code LLM Benchmarks Under Semantic Mutationcited by 1
  5. 2026What Makes a Good Bug Report for an AI Agent?cited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026The Harness Effect: How Orchestration Design Sets the Token Economics of Enterprise Agentic AI
  2. 2026Beyond Token Savings: A Systematic Study of Context Compression in LLM Agents
  3. 2026Prompt-Induced Waste in Coding Agents: Reasoning, Effort, Harness Design, and End-to-End Cost
  4. 2026Token Reduction Is Not Cost Reduction
  5. 2026Analyzing and Mitigating Cost-Inefficient Behaviors in Coding Agents
  6. 2026How Do AI Coding Agents Contribute to Software Development? an Empirical Study of Agentic Pull Requests
  7. 2026Are Online Skill and Memory Modules Always Worth Their Tokens? A Budget-Constrained Study of Web Agents
  8. 2026On the Impact of AGENTS.md Files on the Efficiency of AI Coding Agents