Assurance Envelopes for Autonomous Coding Agents: Minimum-Cost Evidence for Software Change
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
When a coding agent returns to existing software, it inherits evidence from earlier engineering work: tests, type checks, proofs, static analyses, and traces. Reloading all of it is wasteful, but dropping a piece the change depends on can leave a required property unsupported. Given the properties a change must preserve, its obligations, we ask which least-cost subset of the available evidence re-establishes them, and we call such a subset a task-conditioned assurance envelope. Evidence and the rules that combine it form a typed inference graph; an obligation is met when forward chaining from the selected evidence reaches it, and we validate every selection by that closure rather than by trusting the optimizer. The software-derived graphs in our evaluation come from preserved outcomes of prior AI coding-agent runs; we freeze those artifacts and ask which accumulated evidence should be restored for a later task. Small graphs from Rust, IronBlocks, and Pong outcomes show that the minimum envelope depends on the task, that none may exist when current evidence cannot re-establish a required property, that some properties need several pieces of evidence together, and that expanding the requirements adds evidence rather than replacing it. A prespecified synthetic benchmark of 249 instances characterizes computation: a baseline that discards the 'several pieces together' structure necessarily fails to re-derive them; every completed exact cross-check agreed with the CP-SAT optimizer; and median solve time stayed below 20 ms at 500-evidence graphs, except that graphs with many alternative derivations per target timed out at far smaller sizes, so structure, not raw size, drives difficulty. The contribution is a bounded application of established optimization to selecting assurance context for a software change; discovering the obligations and downstream agent benefit remain open.
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 15 of its 50 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Sep 2026.
Builds on
15 of 50 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Intent Formalization: A Grand Challenge for Reliable Coding in the Age of AI Agents17 Mar
- 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering6 May
Other references · 13
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2023MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systemscited by 1,389
- 2024Repoformer: Selective Retrieval for Repository-Level Code Completioncited by 55
- 2022Interactive Code Generation via Test-Driven User-Intent Formalizationcited by 50
- 2024AlphaVerus: Bootstrapping Formally Verified Code Generation through Self-Improving Translation and Treefinementcited by 35
- 2017Engineering Trustworthy Self-Adaptive Software with Dynamic Assurance Casescited by 14
- 2019Perpetual Assurances for Self-Adaptive Systemscited by 9
- 2020Proof Repair across Type Equivalencescited by 8
- 2025Local Success Does Not Compose: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Compositional Formal Verificationcited by 6
- 2020Integration of Formal Proof into Unified Assurance Cases with Isabelle/SACMcited by 5
- 2024ACCESS: Assurance Case Centric Engineering of Safety-critical Systemscited by 2
- 2025An Infrastructure Software Perspective Toward Computation Offloading between Executable Specifications and Foundation Modelscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026From Experiments to Decisions: Reusing Evidence in Autonomous Coding Research
- 2026Preventing Premature Commitment in Coding Agents with an Evidence-Conditioned Execution Layer
- 2026Trust Is Not a Score: Runtime Assurance Contracts for High-Risk AI Agents
- 2026Engineering Reliable Coding Agents: Evaluating and Operating the System Around the Model
- 2026Teaching Agents to Code Reliably
- 2026The Verification Horizon: No Silver Bullet for Coding Agent Rewards
- 2026ClayBuddy: A Framework, Evaluation, & Mitigation of Coding Agent Failures
- 2026The reach of a verification tool decides its value: A controlled study of verification surface, artifact quality, and cost in AI coding agents