Rebuild-dossier is presented, an open-source tool that locks an application's real interface - its exact inputs and outputs - before any code is written, then enforces one-test-at-a-time building through automated checks, not written instructions alone.
Abstract
An AI agent's rebuild is only as good as the process that produced it. Prior work found that once a model is strong enough, a multi-agent rebuild pipeline loses to the simplest approach: giving the model the original code and one instruction (AgentModernize). We present rebuild-dossier, an open-source tool that locks an application's real interface - its exact inputs and outputs - before any code is written, then enforces one-test-at-a-time building through automated checks, not written instructions alone. Three results shape this evaluation, with differing amounts of evidence. First, in a small comparison, the compliant agent failed a held-back test while the rule-breaking agent passed everything - proof that a passing suite doesn't certify correctness when tests can be gamed. Second, we tested whether this beats simply giving the weaker model the source and one instruction: tied on a small app, but lost outright on a larger one where the automated check wasn't even running - pointing to the check mechanism, not interface-locking, which held up separately. Third, every claim here is checked at three levels - the agent's own report, an automated log, and the actual files produced - catching real errors, including a bug in our own logging code, that a single level would have missed. These risks reproduce on a different model and toolchain: a stronger model followed our process three times running, something the weaker model never managed. The tool is public, MIT licensed, and reproduces end to end against our own applications.
AgentCheck is presented, an open-source web workbench that turns an MCP server into an intervention surface that makes tool-using LLM failure modes reproducible, comparable, and verifiable before deployment.
Aritra Mazumder, N. J. Lia· arXiv.org· 2 citations· ⚡1
A pipeline promoting an AI system publishes records claiming the thing evaluated is the thing deployed and that the evidence licensed the transition, and measures whether those records can express that claim and whether it holds where declared.
String is presented, an open-source runtime that gives this new class of software user an interface of its own and treats the job as an operating-systems problem and what three months of production use taught us.
LLM agents that conduct research (proposing ideas, writing and running code, analyzing results) can already carry a study from research question to figures, yet cannot be fully trusted. The same question asked twice in a row returns different answers; the agent announces a number that no execution produced, and tool use does not prevent this, because nothing binds what the agent reports to what its tools returned; a small upstream change leaves downstream results silently stale, with no way to list which ones; and the agent re-runs preprocessing and rewrites code it has already produced. We argue these failures share one root: every step of today's agent loop is a stochastic LLM call whose internal state nobody, including the agent, can check. Rather than trying to see inside the LLM, we take a lesson from databases, which earn trust without being watched, because deterministic operators over well-defined state make their guarantees hold by construction. We propose organizing a research project the same way. The project lives in a deterministic, versioned dataflow engine (in effect, a query plan over materialized views), and the LLM, together with the user, is a stochastic compiler that may only edit that plan. The executor never calls the LLM; LLM output enters only as versioned code and data that the executor then runs, and any asserted result enters the record only with an execution behind it. Five design rules at this boundary turn familiar database machinery, from versioning and provenance to incremental maintenance and cost-based scheduling, into guarantees that make research reliable, non-wasteful, transparent, and collaborative. This report presents the diagnosis, the requirements, and the design; the guarantee walkthrough, a prototype, and the research agenda appear in the full version, in preparation. The LLM, we argue, should be the query compiler, never the executor.
Kyoungmin Kim, Anastasia Ailamaki· arXiv.org· 0 citations
Raising effort did change behaviour, but only in inspection: rule-probe rates rose in all conditions, but only in inspection: rule-probe rates rose in all conditions, a pattern inconsistent with the hypothesis of targeted search.
WasmMend is presented, the first system to automatically repair Native-Wasm functional discrepancies and demonstrates the value of divergence-guided reasoning for cross-platform repair.