arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Gias Uddin

Publications and source records attributed to Gias Uddin.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
arXiv2026

Automatic Assistance to Reduce Information Overload during Software Issue Report Understanding

Modern issue tracking systems are used to log an issue and track it from its inception to closure. Issue reports with diverse discussions from stakeholders can be large and verbose, making them challenging to analyze quickly. Our developer interviews revealed that they struggled with the diverse information in issue reports and demanded automated techniques to classify and summarize information. We designed a tool, iSum (issue summarizer), that helps with the automatic classification and summarization of information types discussed in issue reports. The summarizer offers two views: 1. Developer View takes an issue report as input and outputs visualized summaries of information in the report. 2. Manager View takes a suite of all issue reports under a given software project as inputs and shows the prevalence and trends of different information types across the reports. We evaluated iSum through three studies. 1. In an empirical study over two benchmarks, iSum offers, on average, 11-13% higher F1-scores than state-of-the-art baselines to detect information types. 2. We conducted a user study in task-based setup with 30 developers to determine iSum's effectiveness in issue exploration scenarios. Results showed increased productivity and accuracy with iSum compared to manual inspection. 3. We assessed iSum's feasibility for development and management tasks. It proved useful to both developers and project managers for issue comprehension and trend monitoring.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Structured Security Explanations for Learning-Based Vulnerability Detection

Software vulnerability detection remains difficult because existing approaches rely on predefined analysis rules, learn vulnerability patterns implicitly from code and labels, or use large language models (LLMs) to make the final security judgment. It remains unclear whether structured descriptions of security-relevant program behavior can improve supervised detection. We present VulnLens, an explanation-augmented framework for binary C/C++ vulnerability detection that separates program-behavior analysis from the final decision. A label-blind LLM-based Explainer examines each function from seven fixed perspectives: data flow, memory access, object lifetime, arithmetic and type behavior, control flow, shared state, and external-resource access. Without receiving vulnerability labels or CWE information, it generates structured explanations. A supervised Detector combines source code and explanations through sequential cross-attention. We evaluate VulnLens on a PrimeVul-derived dataset covering ten CWE categories and test transfer to SecVulEval without retraining. On the 526-function PrimeVul test set, VulnLens achieves 75.5% accuracy and 77.2% F1, exceeding DeepSeek V4 Pro by 4.2 percentage points in accuracy and Gemini 2.5 Pro by 2.2 points in F1. Matched explanations improve F1 by 7.3 points over a separately trained code-only detector. On SecVulEval, VulnLens achieves 66.4% accuracy and 65.8% F1, outperforming DeepSeek V4 Pro by 7.6 points in accuracy and 20.0 points in F1, and Gemini 2.5 Pro by 16.6 points in accuracy and 7.8 points in F1.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Then there is prompt injection, a malicious email, ...: The Wild Wide West of OpenClaw Agentic System Security

AI-powered personal assistant frameworks such as OpenClaw combine LLM reasoning, persistent memory, tool invocation, local execution, and web-based workflows. These capabilities enable useful automation, but they also create security risks when untrusted inputs, model reasoning, tools, memory, and deployment configuration interact without explicit trust boundaries. This paper presents an empirical study of reported security concerns in OpenClaw using two complementary data sources: Reddit discussions and security-tagged GitHub issues. We analyze more than 25K Reddit posts from 13 OpenClaw-related subreddits and identify 162 security-relevant posts with 1,787 associated comments. We further collect 358 security-tagged GitHub issues and retain 180 issues describing concrete security concerns. Using qualitative analysis and evidence-grounded CWE mapping, we identify 521 CWE instances across 59 distinct weakness types, concentrated in access-control failures, sensitive-data exposure, injection, and unsafe execution. We also extract 543 practitioner mitigation suggestions and consolidate them into seven recurring strategies. To complement the empirical analysis, we present an evidence-grounded illustrative reconstruction of a representative sensitive-data exposure pathway using dummy secret values. Our findings show that OpenClaw security issues are not isolated implementation bugs; they reflect recurring trust-boundary failures across the agent execution pipeline. We discuss how these weaknesses map to both traditional software-security categories and agent-specific failure mechanisms, and derive implications for safer agentic systems, including explicit trust boundaries, least-privilege tool access, execution containment, runtime oversight, and defense-in-depth deployment.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Making Small Code LLMs More Efficient for Secure Code Review with Neuro-Symbolic Fine-Tuning

As AI coding assistants generate more code, the need to review it for security flaws grows. Existing approaches leave a gap: static analyzers identify program sites but offer little explanation, while language-model explanations can be difficult to verify. Small open-weight code models could make security review available without sending proprietary code to a hosted service. We study whether fine-tuning helps these models turn security evidence into explanations that developers and tools can check. We present secSemScan, which pairs a static analyzer with a locally deployable model that writes a schema-constrained security monologue naming program sites, assigning a CWE, and giving a machine-parseable verdict. We also introduce OGSM (Oracle-Grounded Security Monologue), a dataset of 1,993 C/C\texttt{++} functions covering 22 CWEs in the taint and lifetime families. Each record pairs a function with analyzer-derived or fix-diff-derived evidence and a monologue. We fine-tune three open-weight code models in two stages, first on the output format and then on the monologue content. Because evaluation prompts supply the verdict and evidence, our results measure how well models use that information, not whether they detect vulnerabilities independently. On 355 test records, fine-tuning raised Qwen2.5-Coder-7B's verdict accuracy from 4.8\% to 96.6\%; DeepSeek-Coder-6.7B reached 78.9\%, and StarCoder2-7B reached 43.7\%. Qwen2.5-Coder-7B cited 87.5\% of Tier~1 oracle sites, and every line it cited belonged to the oracle evidence. The results suggest that fine-tuning helps small models produce more structured, evidence-linked security reasoning.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Secure and Functional Code Generation with Self-Evaluation

Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate functionally correct code that remains insecure. Security-focused fine-tuning can be expensive and is not always available, motivating inference-time approaches. Security-oriented prompting and retrieval can reduce vulnerabilities, but may also remove required behavior or apply defenses incompatible with the task. The challenge is to identify relevant security knowledge and use it to improve security without sacrificing functionality. We present SecGent, an inference-time framework that retrieves weakness context from the Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) database and applies it to secure code generation. By connecting task specifications to relevant textual CWE records, SecGent provides task-specific security guidance without relying on retrieved vulnerable or patched code examples. Complementary functional and security tests check the resulting implementation, and their execution feedback guides repairs toward satisfying both objectives. We evaluate SecGent with four open-source LLMs and Claude Sonnet 5.5 across five programming languages on the CWEval benchmark. It achieves the highest joint functional--security success against four inference-time baselines for all five models. Across the open-weight models, mean functional-security@1 (FS@1) improves by 15.5% over RAG, with gains in both functionality and security, and by 19.8% over the strongest prompt optimizer compiled for each model. On Sonnet, FS@1 reaches 92.1%, outperforming the strongest baseline AutoGen by 4.8%. In a separate comparison, SecGent outperforms Claude Code with security-focused prompting by over 6% in FS@1. Feedback-guided repair further improves FS@1 by up to 6.7% over generation without feedback, primarily by recovering functionality while checking security.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Stack Trace-Based Crash Deduplication with Transformer Adaptation

Automated crash reporting systems generate large volumes of duplicate reports, overwhelming issue-tracking systems and increasing developer workload. Traditional stack trace-based deduplication methods---relying on string similarity, rule-based heuristics, or deep learning (DL) models---often fail to capture the contextual and structural relationships within stack traces. We propose dedupT, a transformer-based approach that models stack traces holistically rather than as isolated frames. dedupT first adapts a pretrained language model (PLM) to stack traces, then uses its embeddings to train a fully-connected network (FCN) to rank duplicate crashes effectively. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets show that dedupT outperforms existing DL and traditional methods (e.g., sequence alignment and information retrieval techniques) in both duplicate ranking and unique crash detection, significantly reducing manual triage effort. On four public datasets, dedupT improves Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR) often by over 15% compared to the best DL baseline and up to 10% over traditional methods while achieving higher Receiver Operating Characteristic Area Under the Curve (ROC-AUC) in detecting unique crash reports. Our work advances the integration of modern natural language processing (NLP) techniques into software engineering, providing an effective solution for stack trace-based crash deduplication.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

How Effectively Do Security Skills Guide Coding Agents in Vulnerability Detection in Linux Kernel?

Large language model (LLM) coding agents, such as Claude Code, are increasingly used for security auditing, with task-specific skills providing reusable vulnerability-analysis procedures. However, their effectiveness in detecting real vulnerabilities and the reasons for their failures remain unclear. We conduct the first large-scale empirical study of 37 security skills using Claude Code with four underlying LLMs on 100 real Linux kernel vulnerabilities across ten classes, totaling 14800 runs. We evaluate vulnerability detection at the function, statement, and vulnerability-class levels. Results show that 24.4 percent of runs locate the correct function, 18.3 percent identify both the function and responsible statement, and 15.7 percent correctly classify the vulnerability. Our failure analysis reveals limitations in evidence acquisition, state-relation reasoning, code interpretation, candidate verification, investigation coverage, and reporting. Based on these findings, we propose SKILL-SIF, a self-improving framework that iteratively evolves security skills by learning from missed vulnerabilities and failure patterns. We evolve five top-performing skills using the original benchmark and evaluate them on 100 previously unseen vulnerabilities. SKILL-SIF improves fully correct vulnerability detection by up to eight times (from 2 percent to 16 percent) on unseen vulnerabilities, while aggregate accuracy across four LLMs increases by 1.85 times (from 6.05 percent to 11.20 percent). These findings highlight the limitations of existing security skills and demonstrate the potential of failure-driven skill evolution to improve vulnerability detection in coding agents.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Adversarial Testing of Automated Program Repair Agents for Security Vulnerabilities

Software agents with Large Language Models (LLMs) are designed for Automated Program Repair (APR) tasks, raising the possibility that, in the near future, APR agents will fix bugs automatically without much human intervention. Can we trust an APR agent to produce both functionally correct and secure code in such situations? What if attackers target production APR agents with adversarial issues that seem benign but may influence the agents to produce correct but insecure code? In this paper, we took a first step towards answering these questions by conducting an empirical study. First, we created SWEADV, a benchmark of 750 adversarial issue descriptions constructed from 150 repair tasks in SWE-bench Verified. For each repair task, we created five adversarial issue descriptions, one for each attack type: command execution, deserialization, path traversal, denial of service, and weak hashing. Second, we evaluated mini_swe APR agents from three LLM backends on SWEADV: GPT-5-Mini, MiniMax-M2.5, and DeepSeek-R. We found that on average, adversarial issue descriptions can induce malicious behaviors with successful repair in 51.7% of cases. Third, we investigated whether typical detection mechanisms are sufficient to prevent such malicious patches from being accepted. Pre-repair detection with LLM-as-judge on the adversarial issue descriptions resulted in an average detection accuracy of only 62.3%. Post-repair detection on adversarial APR patches using static analysis tools and LLM-as-judge achieved average detection accuracies of only 39.4% and 55.4%, respectively. We conclude that autonomous APR agents cannot be trusted yet in production deployment, given their susceptibility to adversarial attacks.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Impossible to hide secret ...: Uncovering Security and Privacy Issues in LLM-native IDEs

LLM-native IDEs (Integrated Development Environments), aka LIDEs, are designed from the ground up to work with Large Language Models (LLMs). LIDEs have found remarkable success in Software Engineering (SE) tasks such as coding, debugging, and program comprehension. LIDEs are software systems, and, like any system, they can exhibit vulnerabilities. In this paper, we study the security and privacy issues that developers reported while using popular LIDEs in their development tasks. We collected 1.1M posts from 29 popular subreddits related to LIDEs. We identified 446 posts and analyzed over 6K comments to the posts that discussed security and privacy issues in almost all popular LIDEs, such as Cursor, Copilot, Codex, etc. Using a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods, we constructed a taxonomy of the reported security and privacy issues. Our results show that most issues in LIDEs stem from system-level design choices, rather than the underlying LLMs, such as user data access, unchecked autonomous actions, etc. To overcome these issues, developers frequently relied on external safeguards like code sandboxing and manual reviewing, highlighting prevalent mistrust among developers about LIDEs. We share lessons from our study to support future design of secure and privacy-aware LIDEs.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Developer Experiences with Cursor AI-native IDE

AI-powered integrated development environments (IDEs) are increasingly positioned as practical tools for software development, integrating AI assistance into everyday activities such as editing, refactoring, and debugging. However, how developers evaluate AI IDEs as working environments, what frictions shape their adoption, and which aspects of the experience matter most in everyday use remain underexplored. Prior evidence on adoption and use is mainly controlled tasks, small interview samples, and short observation windows, which offer limited visibility into longitudinal, community-driven experience and the workflow drift that emerges in everyday practice. To bridge this gap, we conduct a large-scale longitudinal study of Cursor, a prominent AI-native IDE, through its official public forum, where users report bugs, request features, and discuss everyday use. Our analysis covers 14,714 forum posts collected over more than two years. We find that discussion is dominated by workflow-critical mechanisms (71%) such as context indexing, model routing, and agent workflows, which are also the main sources of both perceived value and frustration. Negative experiences center on usability, pricing, and dependability, including installation and setup, usage limits and consumption, crashes, and latency. Over time, the focus of friction shifts from early access and setup barriers toward pricing, robustness, and sustained workflow reliability.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Reward-Free Code Alignment from Pretrained or Fine-Tuned LLM: Unpacking the Trade-offs for Code Generation

Large Language Model (LLM) alignment trains an LLM using preference data to produce outputs that better meet established quality standards. While LLM alignment techniques are studied for non-coding tasks, we know little about their usefulness for coding tasks. It is unclear whether LLM code alignment could support both functional requirements (producing executable, correct code) and non-functional requirements (code readability, style, maintainability). It is also unknown whether alignment for a code LLM should begin with base pretrained version or the finetuned (i.e., instruction-tuned) version of the LLM. In this paper, we offer insights on the above two research questions by conducting an empirical study. We studied five state-of-the-art (SOTA) LLMs using two widely used LLM alignment techniques: Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and BoNBoN. For each training record, we created a preference pair as accepted and rejected instances by using the SelfCodeAlign pipeline. DPO and BoNBoN are reward-free models, i.e., they eliminate the need for multiple reward scores for output preferences. We tuned each LLM using the two alignment techniques in two settings: pretrained and finetuned versions of an LLM. We evaluated functional requirements using four SOTA benchmarks (HumanEval+, MBPP+, EvalPerf, EvoEval) and non-functional requirements using the CODAL benchmark, which evaluates code quality across five dimensions derived from software engineering practices. We find that pretrained-to-aligned pathways achieve larger improvements in the aligned variant over its pretrained variant. But the pretrained variant is generally less accurate than its finetuned variant. However, finetuned- to-aligned offers smaller performance improvements or, in some cases, degradation in the aligned variant than its finetuned variant.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

BLAgent: Agentic RAG for File-Level Bug Localization

Bug localization remains a key bottleneck for large language model (LLM)-based software maintenance, where accurately identifying faulty code is essential for debugging, root cause analysis, triage, and automated program repair (APR). File-level bug localization is especially critical in hierarchical localization and repair pipelines, where incorrect file selection can propagate to downstream stages such as function-level localization and patch generation. While Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) offers a promising way to ground LLMs in repository context, existing RAG pipelines often rely on static retrieval and lack the reasoning needed to accurately identify faulty code. In this work, we present BLAgent, a novel agentic RAG framework for file-level bug localization that integrates three key ideas: (i) code structure-aware repository encoding with path-augmented AST-based chunking, (ii) dual-perspective query transformation that captures both structural and behavioral signals from bug reports, and (iii) two-phase agentic reranking that combines symbolic inspection with evidence-grounded reasoning. Unlike prior graph-based or multi-hop agentic approaches, BLAgent adopts a bounded reasoning strategy that limits LLM-based inspection and reranking to a compact, retrieval-filtered set of candidate files, avoiding open-ended repository traversal. This design balances localization accuracy with computational cost. On SWE-bench-Lite, BLAgent attains over 78% Top-1 accuracy with open-source models and over 86% with a closed-source model, while being over 18x cheaper than the strongest baseline using the same model. When integrated into an APR framework, BLAgent improves end-to-end repair success by up to 25%.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

ABTest: Behavior-Driven Testing for AI Coding Agents

AI coding agents are increasingly integrated into real-world software development workflows, yet their robustness under diverse and adversarial scenarios remains poorly understood. We present ABTest, a behavior-driven fuzzing framework that systematically tests coding agents by turning real-world failure reports into repository-grounded behavioral tests. ABTest (1) mines user-reported anomalies to derive reusable workflow patterns (Interaction Patterns) and behaviors (Action types); (2) composes them into stepwise fuzzing templates; (3) instantiates executable test cases in real repositories; (4) executes them with coding agents while recording traces and artifacts; and (5) detects and validates anomalous behaviors. We apply ABTest to three widely used coding agents: Claude Code, OpenAI Codex CLI, and Gemini CLI. From 400 user-reported developer-confirmed agent failures, we extract 47 Interaction Patterns and 128 Action types, generating 647 repository-grounded fuzzing cases. Executing the 647-case bundle once per evaluated configuration, ABTest flags 1,573 behavioral anomalies across the three coding agent families, of which 642 are manually confirmed as new true anomalies, achieving a detection precision of 40.8%. Our results demonstrate that ABTest effectively uncovers real-world failures, exposes robustness differences across models, and reveals previously unreported failure modes.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Secret Leak Detection in Software Issue Reports using LLMs: A Comprehensive Evaluation

In the digital era, accidental exposure of sensitive information such as API keys, tokens, and credentials is a growing security threat. While most prior work focuses on detecting secrets in source code, leakage in software issue reports remains largely unexplored. This study fills that gap through a large-scale analysis and a practical detection pipeline for exposed secrets in GitHub issues. Our pipeline combines regular expression-based extraction with large language model (LLM)-based contextual classification to detect real secrets and reduce false positives. We build a benchmark of 54,148 instances from public GitHub issues, including 5,881 manually verified true secrets. Using this dataset, we evaluate entropy-based baselines and keyword heuristics used by prior secret detection tools, classical machine learning, deep learning, and LLM-based methods. Regex and entropy based approaches achieve high recall but poor precision, while smaller models such as RoBERTa and CodeBERT greatly improve performance (F1 = 92.70%). Proprietary models like GPT-4o perform moderately in few-shot settings (F1 = 80.13%), and fine-tuned open-source larger LLMs such as Qwen and LLaMA reach up to 94.49% F1. Finally, we also validate our approach on 178 real-world GitHub repositories, achieving an F1-score of 81.6% which demonstrates our approach's strong ability to generalize to in-the-wild scenarios.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

TriagerX: Dual Transformers for Bug Triaging Tasks with Content and Interaction Based Rankings

Pretrained Language Models or PLMs are transformer-based architectures that can be used in bug triaging tasks. PLMs can better capture token semantics than traditional Machine Learning (ML) models that rely on statistical features (e.g., TF-IDF, bag of words). However, PLMs may still attend to less relevant tokens in a bug report, which can impact their effectiveness. In addition, the model can be sub-optimal with its recommendations when the interaction history of developers around similar bugs is not taken into account. We designed TriagerX to address these limitations. First, to assess token semantics more reliably, we leverage a dual-transformer architecture. Unlike current state-of-the-art (SOTA) baselines that employ a single transformer architecture, TriagerX collects recommendations from two transformers with each offering recommendations via its last three layers. This setup generates a robust content-based ranking of candidate developers. TriagerX then refines this ranking by employing a novel interaction-based ranking methodology, which considers developers' historical interactions with similar fixed bugs. Across five datasets, TriagerX surpasses all nine transformer-based methods, including SOTA baselines, often improving Top-1 and Top-3 developer recommendation accuracy by over 10%. We worked with our large industry partner to successfully deploy TriagerX in their development environment. The partner required both developer and component recommendations, with components acting as proxies for team assignments-particularly useful in cases of developer turnover or team changes. We trained TriagerX on the partner's dataset for both tasks, and it outperformed SOTA baselines by up to 10% for component recommendations and 54% for developer recommendations.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

IssueGuard: Real-Time Secret Leak Prevention Tool for GitHub Issue Reports

GitHub and GitLab are widely used collaborative platforms whose issue-tracking systems contain large volumes of unstructured text, including logs, code snippets, and configuration examples. This creates a significant risk of accidental secret exposure, such as API keys and credentials, yet these platforms provide no mechanism to warn users before submission. We present \textsc{IssueGuard}, a tool for real-time detection and prevention of secret leaks in issue reports. Implemented as a Chrome extension, \textsc{IssueGuard} analyzes text as users type and combines regex-based candidate extraction with a fine-tuned CodeBERT model for contextual classification. This approach effectively separates real secrets from false positives and achieves an F1-score of 92.70\% on a benchmark dataset, outperforming traditional regex-based scanners. \textsc{IssueGuard} integrates directly into the web interface and continuously analyzes the issue editor, presenting clear visual warnings to help users avoid submitting sensitive data. The source code is publicly available at \href{https://github.com/disa-lab/IssueGuard}{https://github.com/disa-lab/IssueGuard} , and a demonstration video is available at \href{https://youtu.be/kvbWA8rr9cU}{https://youtu.be/kvbWA8rr9cU} .

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Evaluating the Environmental Impact of using SLMs and Prompt Engineering for Code Generation

The shift from cloud-hosted Large Language Models (LLMs) to locally deployed open-source Small Language Models (SLMs) has democratized AI-assisted coding; however, it has also decentralized the environmental footprint of AI. While prompting strategies - such as Chain-of-Thought and ReAct - serve as external mechanisms for optimizing code generation without modifying model parameters, their impact on energy consumption and carbon emissions remains largely invisible to developers. This paper presents the first systematic empirical study investigating how different prompt engineering strategies in SLM-based code generation impact code generation accuracy alongside sustainability factors. We evaluate six prominent prompting strategies across 11 open-source models (ranging from 1B to 34B parameters) using the HumanEval+ and MBPP+ benchmarks. By measuring Pass@1 accuracy alongside energy (kWh), carbon emissions (kgCO2eq), and inference latency, we reveal that sustainability often decouples from accuracy, allowing significant environmental optimizations without sacrificing performance. Our findings indicate that Chain-of-Thought, being a simpler prompting technique, can provide a near-optimal balance between reasoning capability and energy efficiency. Conversely, multi-sampling strategies often incur disproportionate costs for marginal gains. Finally, we identify grid carbon intensity as the dominant factor in deployment-time emissions, highlighting the need for practitioners to consider regional energy profiles. This work provides a quantitative foundation for "green" prompt engineering, enabling developers to align high-performance code generation with ecological responsibility.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Engineering Pitfalls in AI Coding Tools: An Empirical Study of Bugs in Claude Code, Codex, and Gemini CLI

The rapid integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into software development workflows has given rise to a new class of AI-assisted coding tools, such as Claude-Code, Codex, and Gemini CLIs. While promising significant productivity gains, the engineering process of building these tools, which sit at the complex intersection of traditional software engineering, AI system design, and human-computer interaction, is fraught with unique and poorly understood challenges. This paper presents the first empirical study of engineering pitfalls in building such tools, on a systematic, manual analysis of over 3.8K publicly reported bugs in the open-source repositories of three AI-assisted coding tools (i.e., Claude-Code, Codex, and Gemini CLIs) on GitHub. Specifically, we employ an open-coding methodology to manually examine the issue description, associated user discussions, and developer responses. Through this process, we categorize each bug along multiple dimensions, including bug type, bug location, root cause, and observed symptoms. This fine-grained annotation enables us to characterize common failure patterns and identify recurring engineering challenges. Our results show that more than 67% of the bugs in these tools are related to functionality. In terms of root causes, 36.9% of the bugs stem from API, integration, or configuration errors. Consequently, the most commonly observed symptoms reported by users are API errors (18.3%), terminal problems (14%), and command failures (12.7%). These bugs predominantly affect the tool invocation (37.2%) and command execution (24.7%) stages of the system workflow. Collectively, our findings provide a critical roadmap for developers seeking to design the next generation of reliable and robust AI coding assistants.

cs.SE↗