Large Language Model-Based Agents for Software Engineering: A Survey
Open accessAbstract
The recent advance in Large Language Models (LLMs) has shaped a new paradigm of AI agents, i.e., LLM-based agents. Compared to standalone LLMs, LLM-based agents substantially extend the versatility and expertise of LLMs by enhancing LLMs with the capabilities of perceiving and utilizing external resources and tools. To date, LLM-based agents have been applied and shown remarkable effectiveness in Software Engineering (SE). The synergy between multiple agents and human interaction brings further promise in tackling complex real-world SE problems. In this work, we present a comprehensive and systematic survey on LLM-based agents for SE. We collect 124 papers and categorize them from two perspectives, i.e., the SE and agent perspectives. In addition, we discuss open challenges and future directions in this critical domain. The repository of this survey is at https://github.com/FudanSELab/Agent4SE-Paper-List.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Agent-based approaches generally equip LLMs with a set of tools and allow agents to iteratively and autonomously perform actions, observe feedback, and plan future steps.
“While there is not a fixed definition for agent-based approaches, they generally equip LLMs with a set of tools and allow agents to iteratively and autonomously perform actions, observe feedback, and plan future steps [56].”
From Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agents (2024) · cites this paper as [56]
Cites
Self-collaboration code generation via ChatGPT
Dong, Y., Jiang, X., Jin, Z., & Li, G. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · doi:10.1145/3672459 · Cited by 256 · cited 10× · see citing works
“Based on this process, some end-to-end software development agents [4], [187], [191], [194] further extend the traditional waterfall process by including iterations in specific phases to ensure the high quality of the generated content.”
InfluentialTeaching Code LLMs to Use Autocompletion Tools in Repository-Level Code Generation
Wang, C., Zhang, J., Feng, Y., Li, T., Sun, W., Liu, Y., & Peng, X. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · doi:10.1145/3714462 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model-based Agents
Zhang, Z., Dai, Q., Bo, X., Ma, C., Li, R., Chen, X., Zhu, J., Dong, Z., & Wen, J.-R. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3748302 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Demystifying LLM-Based Software Engineering Agents
Xia, C. S., Deng, Y., Dunn, S., & Zhang, L. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3715754 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Self-citationAgentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agents
Xia, C. S., Deng, Y., Dunn, S., & Zhang, L. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.01489 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
“Besides fuzzing, researchers have also proposed to leverage LLMs for unit test generation to test individual software units (e.g., methods/classes) [56], such as CodeMosa [52], ChatTester [102], TestPilot [83], and CoverUp [78].”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationSWE-Pruner: Self-Adaptive Context Pruning for Coding Agents
Wang, Y., Shi, Y., Yang, M., Zhang, R., He, S., Lian, H., Chen, Y., Ye, S., Cai, K., & Gu, X. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.16746 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“Agentic systems (Yao et al., 2023; Wei et al., 2022) for software engineering (Yang et al., 2024b; Wang et al., 2024a; Xia et al., 2024; Bouzenia et al., 2024; Qin et al., 2024; Liu et al., 2024) face critical challenges in managing multi-turn interaction contexts.”
Self-citationLive-SWE-agent: Can Software Engineering Agents Self-Evolve on the Fly?
Xia, C. S., Wang, Z., Yang, Y., Wei, Y., & Zhang, L. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.13646 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“1 Introduction Large Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly progressed from simple code autocompletion [7, 11, 21] to interactive agents capable of navigating repositories, running tests, and submitting patches end-to-end [40, 33, 45, 36, 9, 22].”
Self-citationBarbaste, P., Darrigol, T., Vu, G., & Wiltberger, T. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2609.00006
- Authors
- Liu, J., Wang, K., Chen, Y., Peng, X., Chen, Z., Zhang, L., & Lou, Y.
- Affiliations
- Fudan University (CN)
- Nanyang Technological University (SG)
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- ISSN
- 1049-331X (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2409.02977
- OpenAlex
- W7133976416
- Cited by
- 49
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 36 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 306.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
- Keywords
- large language models, LLM agents, software engineering, AI agents, human-AI interaction, multi-agent systems, tool integration, external resource utilization, open problems
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
