The results show that the protection deep agentic search offers may not be free, and that for read-only questions over a repository that can be indexed, retrieval was the stronger and cheaper option.
Abstract
Code agents spend much of their effort simply locating the right code inside a repository. Two approaches dominate current practice. In Semantic Search, the agent retrieves code blocks from a vector index built from the repository in advance. In Deep Agentic Search (also known as grep-search by subagent), a planning agent delegates the exploration to a separate subagent that works in an isolated context window and returns only a condensed result. The second design, which is considered good context engineering practice, exists to protect the main agent from context pollution (also known as context rot), the loss of accuracy that occurs as unrelated material accumulates in the context window. Recent code agents (such as Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity, etc) have adopted it quickly, but there is little evidence on whether it produces better answers. We compare the two approaches on SWE-QA, a benchmark for repository-level code question answering. Semantic search answered 65.2% of questions correctly against 46.2% for deep agentic search, and it produced each correct answer at less than half the cost. To explain the gap, we then coded every failed run into a taxonomy of failure modes. The taxonomy shows that deep agentic search did not remove failures but introduced a new class of them: the single largest share of its failures, 41.8%, occurred at the hand-off between the planner and its sub-agent, and these were usually silent, ending in a fluent and confident answer that was wrong. Deep agentic search addresses a real problem and is now the preferred design in many code agents. However, our results show that the protection it offers may not be free, and that for read-only questions over a repository that can be indexed, retrieval was the stronger and cheaper option.
Answering developer questions about a software repository is a critical yet under-explored problem in software engineering. While existing repository understanding methods have advanced the field, they predominantly rely on surface-level code retrieval and lack the ability for deep reasoning over multiple files, complex software architectures, and grounding answers in long-range code dependencies. To address these limitations, we propose DeepRepoQA, a novel question answering (QA) framework for repository-level code understanding. DeepRepoQA builds on an agentic framework where LLM agents find answers through a systematic tree search over the repository structure. A Monte-Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) mechanism is employed to empower agents to dynamically search, navigate, and inspect code, enabling effective multi-hop reasoning over long-range code dependencies. Comprehensive experiments on the SWE-QA benchmark demonstrate substantial performance gains over strong baselines, validating the effectiveness of systematic MCTS-guided exploration for multi-hop repository reasoning.
Wei Peng, Yuling Shi, Yingwei Ma et al.· 0 citations
It is shown that borderline task difficulty is agent-specific (Spearman rho=0.75), offering a candidate explanation for prior contradictions: single-agent studies draw tasks from different agents'informative bands.
Giving an agent a file about a named expert can supply hard-to-find material, produce a recognizable persona, or change what the agent decides. These are different claims. We test each one. mimeo is an open-source tool that finds a person's public work, checks each extracted quotation against the cached source text, and writes a file an agent can load. Eight logged builds averaged 38 model calls; the check rejects 13.2% of extracted quotations. We tested four expert files with one coding-agent harness. Knowledge access was clearest: mimeo answered all 20 obscure, quotation-heavy questions; no closed-book condition answered more than 10. Keyword search (BM25) over the same pages answered 15-17, a gap this sample cannot resolve. Grounding showed one clear benefit: personas written from model memory misstated a documented position on 1-4 of 20 answers under every grader; the plain agent and mimeo never did. Every persona was easy to spot on short open prompts, and adding task material lowered identification by 18-23 points. mimeo was no more identifiable than a from-memory profile. Judgment transfer remained unresolved because both tests hit their ceiling: every condition found 94-97% of the problems planted in engineering tasks and scored 94-100% on 16 new application scenarios. An AI-judged"sounds like the expert"score changed with the judge: two of four preferred answers based on a model's stereotype, while two found no difference on the same text. That is a caution against relying on a single AI judge. The evidence supports mimeo as a compact, inspectable reference on a person, not as a demonstrated transfer of their judgment. Toolkit and expert profiles: https://github.com/K-Dense-AI/mimeo
A controlled seed-intervention pilot finds that retrieval-derived initial context yields higher file F1 with less post-seed exploration than random non-gold context, while oracle gold context shows substantial remaining headroom.
AutoScientist-Quant, a self evolving search process that regards quantitative research as one budgeted search problem, is presented, a self evolving search process that regards quantitative research as one budgeted search problem.
Zong-Qian Li, Yaoyiran Li, Yao-Hui Guo et al.· 0 citations
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly handle in-context learning (ICL) tasks where a long, novel context defines the rules, knowledge, and output schema for a series of questions. On benchmarks that grade against every detail of the context, even strong open-weights models pass only 12-16% of tasks: a single overlooked rule fails the whole response. We argue this brittleness is structural: the dominant"read-and-reason"paradigm asks the model to extract, plan, generate, and self-verify in one forward pass. We therefore ask whether explicit context compilation can fix it, how it compares to existing long-context strategies (gist retrieval, multi-agent self-play), and where the resulting harness benefit holds across task structure and model scale. We propose the Context Compilation Architecture (CCA), whose central novelty is a typed intermediate representation (IR) with fixed slots (rules.{must_do, must_not, conditional}, output_spec, available_tools, data_profile) into which any prose context is compiled once; executable verifiers and a violation-gated correction loop follow as downstream consequences. On CL-bench (1,899 tasks across 4 open base models), CCA outperforms vanilla prompting and two long-context baselines (ReadAgent-P, Ctx2Skill) on every base model, lifting Kimi K2.5 from 15.4% to 21.4% with gains concentrated on rule-dense sub-categories. Code and cached completions are available at https://github.com/TonyQJH/cca-emnlp2026.
Jin-Hu Qi, Minda Hu, Wen-Tao Zhang et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
