How Coding Agents Fail Their Users: A Large-Scale Analysis of Developer-Agent Misalignment in 20,574 Real-World Sessions
cs.SE, cs.AI, cs.HC
Submitted: 2026-05-28
Updated: 2026-08-31
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: AI coding agents increasingly act directly within software environments, yet existing analyses of their failures rely on benchmark trajectories that miss how developers actually experience
Terminology
Abstract
AI coding agents increasingly act directly within software environments, yet existing analyses of their failures rely on benchmark trajectories that miss how developers actually experience misalignment. We present an observational study of 20,574 coding-agent sessions from 1,639 repositories across IDE and CLI workflows. We operationalize misalignment as a breakdown made visible through developer pushback, and annotate each episode along four axes: form, cause, cost, and resolution. We identify seven recurring forms, spanning how agents read projects, interpret developer intent, follow rules, bound their actions, implement and execute code, and report progress. 90.50% of episodes impose effort and trust costs rather than irreversible system damage, yet 91.49% of visible resolutions still require explicit user correction. Misalignment patterns also differ across IDE and CLI settings, persist across adjacent sessions, and shift over time: while overall rates decline, constraint violations and inaccurate self-reporting grow in share. Our findings inform the design of training, evaluation, and interfaces for keeping coding agents aligned with real developer workflows.
Sources
- Why Are AI Agent Involved Pull Requests (Fix-Related) Remain Unmerged? An Empirical Study
- SWE-chat: Coding Agent Interactions From Real Users in the Wild
- Composer 2 Technical Report
- Where Do AI Coding Agents Fail? An Empirical Study of Failed Agentic Pull Requests in GitHub
- DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning
- Tulu 3: Pushing Frontiers in Open Language Model Post-Training
- The Rise of AI Teammates in Software Engineering (SE) 3.0: How Autonomous Coding Agents Are Reshaping Software Engineering
- Understanding Code Agent Behaviour: An Empirical Study of Success and Failure Trajectories
- Beyond Resolution Rates: Behavioral Drivers of Coding Agent Success and Failure
- Position: Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment
- Programming by Chat: A Large-Scale Behavioral Analysis of 11,579 Real-World AI-Assisted IDE Sessions
Related papers
- Falsification-Based Verification of LLM-Generated Optimization Models: Sound Test Batteries and Their Detection Limits
- GitSkills: A Dataset of Agent Skills on GitHub
- SABER: Benchmarking Operational Safety of LLM Coding Agents in Stateful Project Workspaces
- PackMonitor: Enabling Zero Package Hallucinations Through Decoding-Time Monitoring
- IntentCoding: Amplifying User Intent in Code Generation
- Incentives and Outcomes in Bug Bounties