Papers
arxiv:2607.24882

Agent Retrieval Bench: Evaluating Repository Context Retrieval for Coding Agents

Published on Jul 27
· Submitted by
Bowen Qin
on Jul 29
Authors:

Abstract

Modern coding agents are usually evaluated by whether they eventually produce a correct patch, but patch generation depends on an earlier context-acquisition stage: finding the repository files needed for the task. We introduce Agent Retrieval Bench, a file-level benchmark for this upstream retrieval problem. Samples are built from real coding-workflow signals and evaluated against frozen base-commit repositories, with relevance defined by what an agent needs next rather than direct query-file semantic similarity. The benchmark covers four positive-retrieval tasks: code2test, comment2context, trace2code, and edit2ripple; a fifth subset evaluates selective retrieval using natural evidence-backed no-gold cases and counterfactual wrong-repository controls. Agent Retrieval Bench contains 427 samples across 25 repositories: 345 positive examples, 50 natural no-gold examples, and 32 counterfactual controls. The corpus includes 308 base-commit snapshots, 392,000 files, and 7.9 million chunks. We evaluate lexical retrieval, RepoMap, open-source embeddings, selective abstention, and logged agent context selection. No single retrieval family dominates: Qwen3-Embedding-4B has the best sample-weighted MRR on positive samples, Qwen3-Embedding-8B the best Recall@20, and RepoMap the best budgeted context yield at 8K tokens, with task-level winners differing substantially. Selective thresholds calibrated with counterfactual controls do not improve selective success on natural no-gold cases, revealing a calibration gap. Logged trajectories also miss every gold file on 27-35 percent of samples. 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.

Community

Paper author Paper submitter
edited 1 day ago

Excited to share Agent Retrieval Bench—a benchmark for the often-overlooked first step of coding agents: finding the repository context they need before writing a patch.
ARB includes 427 real-workflow samples across 25 repositories, covering test discovery, review-context retrieval, failure-trace debugging, and change-impact analysis—plus natural and counterfactual cases where agents should abstain. Our results show no single retriever wins everywhere, and current confidence scores still struggle to identify when local repository context is unhelpful.
We’d love feedback, reproductions, and new retrieval baselines.

This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.

The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API

Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!

If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space

You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend

Sign up or log in to comment

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2607.24882
Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2607.24882 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 1

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2607.24882 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.