CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.AIcs.SE2026-07-23

Delivery, Not Storage: Cue-Anchored Working Memory as a Harness Property for Coding Agents

Swapnanil Saha

Coding agents ship with one kind of memory: documents. Instruction files, plan artifacts, and auto-written memory directories are deliberately authored and deliberately retrieved: the agent must choose to write them and choose to read them back. Human expertise runs on a second tier that never gets written down: situationally-bound operational facts (gotchas, locations, local conventions) encoded as a side effect of the work and retrieved involuntarily when the situation cues them. We argue this second tier is the load-bearing one for long-running agents and must be a harness property, not an agent choice. We contribute: (1) a two-tier design theory grounded in the cognitive literature on memory offloading, incidental encoding, and event-based prospective memory, each mapped to an architectural requirement; (2) a cue-anchored memory model where memories carry first-class trigger conditions over a composable vocabulary (path, symbol, semantic, event, temporal), evaluated deterministically by the harness, a composition no surveyed academic or shipped system provides; (3) a controlled evaluation on a real coding task showing that voluntary memory use is near zero even with a pre-seeded store (0 memory operations in 114 turns), that deterministic injection delivered in every seeded run with zero false alarms, and that 39% of intra-session re-reads re-buy content paid for before a compaction boundary; (4) a repeated-compaction decay probe: ten facts held only in conversation vanish at the first summary and stay absent from 106 of 108 compactions, and the deprived agent greps the harness's own session files to rebuild them, while the same facts injected from a harness-owned store arrive intact through all 138 compact-resumes as the final summary carries none. Delivery, not storage, is the product: the reliable memory channel for agents is the one the agent never has to think about.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.SEcs.AIcs.LG2026-07-04

Don't Blame the Large Language Model: How Agent Harness Evolution Shapes Coding Agent Quality

Oussama Ben Sghaier, Hao Li, Bram Adams, Ahmed E. Hassan

Coding agents, autonomous systems that use large language models (LLMs) to resolve software engineering tasks, rely on agent harness: a middleware layer in between a developer and a large language model that orchestrates system prompts, tool execution, context management, and ite…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.SEcs.AIcs.LG2026-07-12

When Does Restricting a Coding Agent to execute_code Help? A Regime $\times$ Agent-Design Ablation

Hong Yang, Qi Yu, Travis Desell

Modern coding agents expose multiple tool surfaces -- IDE primitives, bash, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) code-execution -- and the field has shipped three contradictory claims about which one matters. We run the missing crossed comparison: an integrity-clean three-arm ablatio…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CRcs.AIcs.SE2026-07-22

IssueTrojanBench: Benchmarking AI Coding Agents Against Malicious Issue Requests

Ankur Singh, Jinqiu Yang, Tse-Hsun Chen

AI coding agents powered by LLMs are increasingly integrated into real-world software development, where they generate, edit, and execute code with autonomous access to local files and tools. Coding agents inherit security risks from both the LLM backbone, where adversarial promp…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.SEcs.AI2026-07-18

DataFlow-Harness: A Grounded Code-Agent Platform for Constructing Editable LLM Data Pipelines

Runming He, Zhen Hao Wong, Hao Liang, Zimo Meng, Chengyu Shen, Xiaochen Ma, et al.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to automate data-processing workflows, yet coding agents typically produce scripts that are not automatically materialized as persistent, editable platform artifacts. We call this disconnect the \textit{NL2Pipeline gap}. To bridg…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.SEcs.AI2026-07-14

Multi-Perspective Agentic Program Repair via Code Property Graphs and Temporal Execution Graphs

Zhili Huang, Ling Xu, Hongyu Zhang

Large language models (LLMs) have improved automated program repair (APR), but two limitations remain. First, raw execution traces are often too large and repetitive to serve as effective model context. Second, repeated patch sampling may produce different implementations without…

View free PDFSource page