arXiv subjects

Christoph Treude

Publications and source records attributed to Christoph Treude.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2026

GenAI Is No Silver Bullet for Qualitative Research in Software Engineering

Qualitative research gives rich insights into the quintessentially human aspects of software engineering as a socio-technical system. Qualitative research spans diverse strategies and methods, from interpretivist, in situ observational field studies, to deductive coding of data from mining studies. Advances in large language models and generative AI (GenAI) have prompted claims that artificial intelligence could automate qualitative analysis. Such claims are overgeneralizing from narrow successes. GenAI support must be carefully adapted to the data of interest, but also to the characteristics of a particular research strategy. In this Frontiers of SE paper, we discuss the emerging use of GenAI in relation to the broad spectrum of qualitative research in software engineering. We outline the dimensions of qualitative work in software engineering, review emerging empirical evidence for GenAI assistance, examine the pros and cons of GenAI-mediated qualitative research practices, and revisit qualitative research quality factors, in light of GenAI. Our goal is to inform researchers about the promises and pitfalls of GenAI-assisted qualitative research. We conclude with future plans to advance understanding of its use in software engineering.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Analyzing developer discussions on EU and US privacy legislation compliance in GitHub repositories

Context: Privacy legislation has impacted the way software systems are developed, prompting practitioners to update their implementations. Specifically, the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) have forced the community to focus on users' data privacy.\\ Objectives: Relying on the vast amount of data on developer issues available in GitHub repositories, our aim is to gather empirical evidence on the issues developers of Open Source Software discuss to comply with privacy legislation.\\ Method: We examined such discussions by mining and analyzing 32,820 issues from GitHub repositories. We partially analyzed the dataset automatically to identify law user rights and principles indicated, and manually analyzed a sample of 1,186 issues based on the type of concern addressed.\\ Results: We devised 24 discussion categories placed in six clusters: user rights and consent, compliance implementation, documentation, data storing/sharing, general compliance, and contextual adaptability. Developers mainly focus on specific user rights from the legislation (right to erasure, right to opt-out, right to access), addressing other rights less frequently, while most discussions concern user consent, user rights functionality, bugs and cookie management.\\ Conclusion: The created taxonomy can help practitioners understand which issues are discussed for law compliance, so that they ensure they address them first in their systems. In addition, the educational community can reshape curricula to better educate future engineers on the privacy law concerns raised, and the research community can identify gaps and areas for improvement to support and accelerate data privacy law compliance.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

From Registry to Repository: How AI Agent Skills Are Written, Adapted, and Maintained

AI coding agents increasingly rely on skills: structured context bundles, typically a SKILL$.$md file with a YAML header and Markdown body, loaded on demand for domain knowledge, workflows, and scripts. Public registries such as skills$.$sh now host tens of thousands of skills, making them an emerging unit of reuse in agent-based software engineering. Yet skills have largely been viewed as agent capabilities rather than software artefacts whose content and evolution shape agent behaviour. We present the first empirical study of AI agent skills as engineered artefacts that are authored, reused, customised and maintained, across public registries and personal-use repositories. We mined 18,463 skills from skills$.$sh and 23,199 personal-use skills from 5,876 GitHub repositories, identifying 3,709 reuse links. LLM-based classification into SWEBOK knowledge areas (KAs) shows Software Construction dominates alongside a long tail of specialised areas. A thematic analysis of 180 skills identifies six content categories. Qualitative coding of 444 modifications reveals six themes, of which reworking operational specifications and adapting knowledge and resources are the primary target of change. Our findings show that reuse is largely a one-time copy operation: most reused skills remain near-verbatim, 53% are never modified after adoption, and subsequent local maintenance is overwhelmingly additive. Customisation primarily adapts skills to local environments, whereas evolution accretes new inline domain knowledge. Across both, a stable behavioural contract - how a skill interacts with users, monitors runtime state, and recovers from failures - remains almost untouched. These results suggest maintenance effort should focus on project-specific bindings, and that registries and tool support should enable consolidating the domain knowledge skills re-author in isolation.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Harness Engineering for Agentic AI Coding Tools: An Exploratory Study

Agentic AI coding tools increasingly automate software development tasks. Developers can configure these tools through versioned repository-level artifacts such as Markdown and JSON files. We present a systematic analysis of configuration mechanisms for agentic AI coding tools, covering Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini, and Codex. We identify eight configuration mechanisms spanning from static context to executable and external integrations and, in an empirical study of 2,853 GitHub repositories, examine whether and how they are adopted, with a detailed analysis of Context Files, Skills, and Subagents. First, Context Files dominate the configuration landscape and are often the sole mechanism in a repository, with AGENTS$.$md emerging as an interoperable standard across tools. Second, few repositories adopt advanced mechanisms such as Skills and Subagents. Skills predominantly rely on static instructions rather than executable scripts. Third, distinct configuration practices are forming around different tools, with Claude Code users employing the broadest range of mechanisms. These findings establish an empirical baseline for understanding how developers configure agentic tools, suggest that AGENTS$.$md serves as a natural starting point, and motivate longitudinal and experimental research on how configuration strategies evolve and affect agent performance.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

How Humans, Bots, and Agents Communicate About Vulnerabilities in Pull Requests

Developers may reference vulnerabilities in pull request discussions through both explicit identifiers, such as CVEs or GHSAs, and implicit security-related language (e.g., "unauthorized access" or "SQL injection"). Prior work has primarily focused on explicit identifiers, potentially overlooking vulnerability discussions that lack formal references. Bots and coding agents are becoming more common in pull requests, raising new questions about how different accounts communicate about vulnerabilities. In this registered report, we describe our planned study of vulnerability communication in pull requests by humans, bots, and coding agents. Building on the AIDev-pop dataset, we analyze explicit vulnerability references and implicit security-related signals across pull request titles, descriptions, review comments, commit messages, and timeline discussions. We further investigate whether these references are associated with vulnerabilities introduced or fixed in the modified code and how they relate to pull request review activity and outcomes. This study contributes a large-scale empirical investigation of vulnerability communication practices in modern software development.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Context Rot in AI-Assisted Software Development: Repurposing Documentation Consistency for AI Configuration Artifacts

Developers increasingly provide AI coding assistants with persistent context through configuration files such as CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, and .cursorrules. These files describe code elements, architecture, and development conventions, forming the context that guides AI tool behavior across sessions. As software evolves, this context can become stale, a phenomenon we call context rot. While AI configuration artifacts are new, the underlying consistency problem connects to decades of software documentation research. Researchers have built tools to check consistency between documentation and code, spanning README files, code comments, API documentation, architecture descriptions, and installation instructions. We argue that this existing toolbox is an immediate starting point for detecting context rot, and we present a research roadmap mapping documentation consistency approaches to corresponding problems in this new setting. As preliminary evidence, applying an existing README/wiki consistency checker to a statistically representative sample of 356 repositories identifies stale code element references in 23.0% of repositories, showing that traditional documentation consistency tools can already surface context rot.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

The Impact of Configuring Agentic AI Coding Tools on Build-vs-Buy Decisions: A Study Protocol

Agentic AI coding tools write code with increasing autonomy and in doing so decide when to import a library and when to implement functionality from scratch. These decisions, whether to build functionality from scratch or buy into an external library, hereafter build-versus-buy, carry direct consequences for software security, licensing compliance, performance, and long-term maintainability. Yet no controlled experimental study has examined what governs build-versus-buy decisions in agentic AI coding tools. Configuration mechanisms, i.e., the means by which developers tailor agentic AI coding tool behavior to a project or workflow, are one of the primary means by which practitioners can influence these decisions. However, it is unclear which configuration mechanisms influence build-versus-buy decisions most effectively. We present a pre-registered protocol to study how configuration mechanisms alter build-versus-buy behavior in two popular agentic AI coding tools: Claude Code and OpenAI Codex. We will execute controlled programming tasks drawn from a benchmark of staged projects, each constructed around identifiable build-versus-buy points, and will manipulate the configuration supplied to each tool, ranging from no configuration, through context files with soft preferences and explicit prohibitions, to Skills (instructions that can be autonomously discovered), MCP-enabled library discovery tools, and permission controls, measuring which libraries the tool selects, whether it discloses newly introduced libraries, and whether those disclosures are complete and accurate. Nine pre-registered hypotheses structure the protocol. The resulting benchmark dataset and analysis pipeline will be released as a reusable artifact for evaluating build-versus-buy behavior in agentic AI coding tools.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Improving LLM-Based Go Code Review through Issue-List Generation and Context Augmentation

LLMs have shown strong potential for automating code review, yet their practical utility depends heavily on the design of generation and context strategies. In this paper, we investigate how to improve LLM-based code review through generation strategy and contextual augmentation. We first propose an issue-list review paradigm, in which LLMs enumerate all potential issues rather than reporting only the single most important one (i.e., primary-issue review). We then systematically compare three types of code context augmentation -- neighboring, LSP-based semantics, and IR-based similar co-change context -- and study how they influence issue discovery. Finally, we integrate candidates from no-context and context-enhanced generation to improve review coverage, and introduce refinement-guided pruning to keep the candidate list at a practical size. We evaluate our approach on 1,438 Go review instances using downstream code refinement as the main metric, i.e., how often the candidate list contains at least one comment inducing the same code change as the final human revision. For comparison, we evaluate comments by CodeReviewer, a model trained specifically for review comment generation, as well as ground-truth human review comments (as a practical upper bound), under the same refinement-based evaluation. The results show that our best configuration, combining issue-list review, neighboring and similar co-change context, and candidate integration, reaches 28.00% refinement exact match, a statistically significant gain of +10.85 percentage points over primary-issue review without any additional context (17.15%), substantially outperforming CodeReviewer (15.02%) and approaching the human-oracle ceiling of 36.09%. Our refinement-guided pruning reduces the average candidate count from 7.2 to 3.1 at top-5 while retaining nearly the full benefit, making the candidate list easier to inspect.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Walking the Tightrope of LLMs for Software Development: A Practitioners' Perspective

Background: Large Language Models emerged with the potential of provoking a revolution in software development (e.g., automating processes, workforce transformation). Although studies have started to investigate the perceived impact of LLMs for software development, there is a need for empirical studies to comprehend how to balance forward and backward effects of using LLMs. Objective: We investigated how LLMs impact software development and how to manage the impact from a software developer's perspective. Method: We conducted 22 interviews with software practitioners across 3 rounds of data collection and analysis, between October (2024) and September (2025). We employed Socio-Technical Grounded Theory for Data Analysis (STGT4DA) to rigorously analyse interview participants' responses. Results: We identified the benefits (e.g., maintain developer flow, improve developer mental models, and foster entrepreneurship) and challenges (e.g., damage to developers' reputation) of using LLMs at individual, team, organisation, and society levels; as well as actionable guidances into how mitigate these challenges. Conclusion: Critically, we present the trade-offs that software practitioners, teams, and organisations face in working with LLMs. Our findings are particularly useful for software team leaders and IT managers to assess the viability of LLMs within their specific context.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Deterministic vs. Probabilistic Summarisation: An Empirical Trade-off Study in Design Pattern Centric Java Code

Background: Automated code summarisation supports program comprehension and documentation, yet the relative strengths and limitations of deterministic (heuristic-based) and probabilistic (LLM-based) pipelines remain unclear. Aims: This paper presents a controlled empirical comparison of these paradigms for intent-oriented design-pattern code summarisation. Method: Using design-pattern-centric Java code as a structured testbed (150 files from three open-source repositories covering nine patterns), we compare a rule-based natural language generation (NLG) pipeline, a Software Word Usage Model (SWUM)-based approach, and a probabilistic pipeline based on the Mixtral LLM. Summaries are evaluated against human references using BERTScore and cosine similarity, complemented by rubric-based judgements produced by Llama 3 across five dimensions: accuracy, conciseness, adequacy, code-context awareness, and design-pattern fidelity. Statistical analysis includes Wilcoxon signed-rank tests (with effect sizes), Friedman tests with post-hoc corrections, and Spearman correlation for sensitivity analysis of rubric consistency. Results: Probabilistic summaries show stronger semantic alignment and richer contextual coverage, while deterministic approaches produce more concise and fully reproducible outputs. Prompt-sensitivity and multi-run analyses indicate variability in LLM outputs, though relative trends remain stable. Conclusions: A clear trade-off emerges: probabilistic methods favour semantic depth and contextual accuracy, whereas deterministic pipelines are preferable for brevity and reproducibility. These findings provide practical guidance for selecting code summarisation techniques.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

A Dataset of Agentic AI Coding Tool Configurations

Agentic AI coding tools such as Claude Code and OpenAI Codex execute multi-step coding tasks with limited human oversight. To steer these tools, developers create repository-level configuration artifacts (e.g., Markdown files) for configuration mechanisms such as Context Files, Skills, Rules, and Hooks. There is no curated dataset yet that captures these configurations at scale. This dataset, collected from open-source GitHub repositories, fills that gap. We selected 40,585 actively maintained repositories through metadata filtering, classified them using GPT-5.2 to identify 36,710 as belonging to engineered software projects, and systematically detected configuration artifacts in these repositories. The dataset covers 4,738 repositories across five tools (Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, OpenAI Codex, Cursor, Gemini) and eight configuration mechanisms. We collected 15,591 configuration artifacts, the full content of 18,167 configuration files associated with these configuration artifacts, and 148,519 AI-co-authored commits. The dataset and the construction pipeline are publicly available on Zenodo under CC BY 4.0. An interactive website allows researchers to browse and explore the data. This data supports research on context engineering, AI tool adoption patterns, and human-AI collaboration.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Operationalizing Ethics for AI Agents: How Developers Encode Values into Repository Context Files

As AI coding agents become embedded in software development workflows, developers are beginning to operationalize ethical principles by encoding behavioral rules into repository-level context files for AI agents, such as AGENTS.md files. Rather than examining the ethics of AI agents in the abstract, this vision paper investigates how ethics and values are already being translated for AI agents into actionable instructions that shape agent behavior. Through a preliminary investigation, we find that developers are already embedding guidance related to fairness, accessibility, sustainability, tone, and privacy. These artifacts function as a developer-authored governance layer, translating abstract principles into situated, natural-language directives within development workflows. We outline a research agenda for studying this emerging practice, including how encoded values vary across communities, what governance dynamics emerge when multiple contributors negotiate these files, and whether agents reliably adhere to the constraints specified. Understanding how ethics and values are operationalized for AI agents is essential to ground AI governance in modern software engineering practice.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Accountable Agents in Software Engineering: An Analysis of Terms of Service and a Research Roadmap

AI coding assistants and autonomous agents are becoming integral to software development workflows, reshaping how code is produced, reviewed, and maintained. While recent research has focused mainly on the capabilities and impacts of productivity of these systems, much less attention has been paid to accountability: who is responsible when agents generate, modify, or recommend code? In practice, accountability is defined through the Terms of Service (ToS) and related policy documents that govern the use of AI-powered development tools. In this vision paper, we present a comparative analysis of the Terms of Service for widely used AI coding assistants and agent-enabled development tools. We examine how these documents allocate ownership, responsibility, liability, and disclosure obligations between tool providers and software developers, and we identify common patterns and divergences between providers. Our analysis reveals a consistent tendency to shift responsibility for correctness, safety, and legal compliance onto users, as well as substantial variation in how providers address issues such as indemnification, data reuse, and acceptable use. Based on these findings, we argue that existing policy frameworks are poorly aligned with increasingly agent-mediated and autonomous software development workflows. We outline a research roadmap for accountable agents in software engineering, identifying challenges and opportunities for modeling responsibility, designing governance artifacts, developing tooling that supports accountability, and conducting empirical studies of developers' perceptions and practices.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

AI Failures in the Eyes of the Downstream Developer: A First Look at Concerns, Practices, and Challenges

With the advancement of AI models, more software systems are adopting AI as a component to facilitate automation. Pre-trained models (PTMs) have become a cornerstone of AI-based software, allowing for rapid integration and development with lower training cost. However, their adoption also introduces failure modes such as data leakage and biased outputs, that may require careful handling by downstream developers. While previous research has proposed taxonomies of these technical concerns and various mitigation strategies, how downstream developers address these issues during the development of general AI-based software when reusing PTMs remains unexplored. Understanding downstream developers' perspectives is essential because they directly influence how these potential failures concerns translate into practice, such as determining whether immediate risks like data leakage or model bias are recognised, mitigated, or inadvertently overlooked in real-world deployments. This study investigates downstream developers' concerns, practices and perceived challenges regarding practical AI failures during the development of AI-based software. To achieve this, we conducted a mixed-method study, including interviews with 16 participants, a survey of 86 practitioners,

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Does AI Code Review Lead to Code Changes? A Case Study of GitHub Actions

AI-based code review tools automatically review and comment on pull requests to improve code quality. Despite their growing presence, little is known about their actual impact. We present a large-scale empirical study of 16 popular AI-based code review actions for GitHub workflows, analyzing more than 22,000 review comments in 178 repositories. We investigate (1) how these tools are adopted and configured, (2) whether their comments lead to code changes, and (3) which factors influence their effectiveness. We develop a two-stage LLM-assisted framework to determine whether review comments are addressed, and use interpretable machine learning to identify influencing factors. Our findings show that, while adoption is growing, effectiveness varies widely. Comments that are concise, contain code snippets, and are manually triggered, particularly those from hunk-level review tools, are more likely to result in code changes. These results highlight the importance of careful tool design and suggest directions for improving AI-based code review systems.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

When AI Models Become Dependencies: Studying the Evolution of Pre-Trained Model Reuse in Downstream Software Systems

Modern software systems have transitioned from purely code-based architectures to AI-integrated systems where pre-trained models (PTMs) serve as permanent dependencies. However, while the evolution of traditional software libraries is well-documented, we lack a clear understanding of how these "PTM dependencies" change over time. Unlike libraries, PTMs are characterized by opaque internals and less standardized, rapidly evolving release cycles. Furthermore, their multi-role nature enables developers to treat individual instances of a single PTM as separate functional dependencies based on their specific downstream tasks. This raises a critical question for software maintenance: do PTMs change like standard software libraries or do they follow a divergent pattern? To answer this, we present the first empirical study of downstream PTM changes, analyzing a comprehensive dataset of 4,988 releases across 323 GitHub OSS repositories that reuse open-source PTMs. Using traditional software libraries as a baseline, we find that PTMs follow a qualitatively distinct pattern. PTMs are typically added late in the project life-cycle and tend to accumulate rather than be replaced as a project matures. Our findings show that PTM changes are three times less frequent (406 of 2,814 release transitions) than library changes. PTM changes are also less routinely documented, but more likely to carry explicit rationale. Unlike libraries, which evolve reactively, PTM evolution is proactively driven by capability expansion, with a unique documented rationale of PTM testing uncertainty. Our work calls for a rethinking of how PTMs are tracked and managed as dependencies in modern software engineering.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

An Empirical Study of API Misuses of Data-Centric Libraries

Developers rely on third-party library Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) when developing software. However, libraries typically come with assumptions and API usage constraints, whose violation results in API misuse. API misuses may result in crashes or incorrect behavior. Even though API misuse is a well-studied area, a recent study of API misuse of deep learning libraries showed that the nature of these misuses and their symptoms are different from misuses of traditional libraries, and as a result highlighted potential shortcomings of current misuse detection tools. We speculate that these observations may not be limited to deep learning API misuses but may stem from the data-centric nature of these APIs. Data-centric libraries often deal with diverse data structures, intricate processing workflows, and a multitude of parameters, which can make them inherently more challenging to use correctly. Therefore, understanding the potential misuses of these libraries is important to avoid unexpected application behavior. To this end, this paper contributes an empirical study of API misuses of five data-centric libraries that cover areas such as data processing, numerical computation, machine learning, and visualization. We identify misuses of these libraries by analyzing data from both Stack Overflow and GitHub. Our results show that many of the characteristics of API misuses observed for deep learning libraries extend to misuses of the data-centric library APIs we study. We also find that developers tend to misuse APIs from data-centric libraries, regardless of whether the API directive appears in the documentation. Overall, our work exposes the challenges of API misuse in data-centric libraries, rather than only focusing on deep learning libraries. Our collected misuses and their characterization lay groundwork for future research to help reduce misuses of these libraries.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Towards an Appropriate Level of Reliance on AI: A Preliminary Reliance-Control Framework for AI in Software Engineering

How software developers interact with Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered tools, including Large Language Models (LLMs), plays a vital role in how these AI-powered tools impact them. While overreliance on AI may lead to long-term negative consequences (e.g., atrophy of critical thinking skills); underreliance might deprive software developers of potential gains in productivity and quality. Based on twenty-two interviews with software developers on using LLMs for software development, we propose a preliminary reliance-control framework where the level of control can be used as a way to identify AI overreliance and underreliance. We also use it to recommend future research to further explore the different control levels supported by the current and emergent LLM-driven tools. Our paper contributes to the emerging discourse on AI overreliance and provides an understanding of the appropriate degree of reliance as essential to developers making the most of these powerful technologies. Our findings can help practitioners, educators, and policymakers promote responsible and effective use of AI tools.

cs.SE↗