aiqbench analysis
This study empirically evaluates whether distilling personalized skills from individual developers' interaction histories improves LLM coding agents compared to generic or no-skill baselines. The findings indicate that while broad, transferable procedural knowledge yields more consistent gains than user-specific preferences, personalization becomes effective only when a developer's history contains frequent examples relevant to future tasks. These results offer critical insights into the scalability and generalizability of adaptive agent behaviors in real-world software engineering workflows.
Do Personalized Skills Help Coding Agents? An Empirical Study of Developer Interaction Histories
arXiv:2608.10319v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-powered agents have rapidly evolved from code-completion tools into solvers of complex software engineering tasks. As developers collaborate with coding agents over time, their preferences emerge through repeated interactions and can be used to adapt agent behavior to better meet individual developers' needs. Capturing and reusing these preferences may reduce repeated corrections and improve developer-agent collaboration. Agent skills provide a lightweight mechanism for transferring experience without modifying model parameters. However, existing work primarily focuses on task-specific skills, and it remains unclear whether developer-specific skills distilled from interaction histories can generalize to future tasks. We propose a framework for extracting reusable developer preferences from interaction traces. It first generates personalized skills through rule-based bootstrapping and evidence-grounded refinement, and then evaluates them using a reproducible replay framework with an interactive, trajectory-conditioned LLM-based human developer simulator. We conduct an experiment on 206 real-world developer-agent sessions from 13 developers and compare personalized skills against no-skill, generic-skill, and other-user-skill baselines. Personalized skills provide small and inconsistent improvements over the no-skill baseline, whereas generic skills pooled across developers achieve the largest and most consistent gains. Further analysis suggests that personalized skills become more effective when developer preferences appear frequently, particularly when their histories contain multiple examples relevant to future tasks. These findings provide empirical insights into when developer-specific personalization is effective and demonstrate that broadly transferable procedural knowledge can be more robust than developer-specific preference signals.
Title:Do Personalized Skills Help Coding Agents? An Empirical Study of Developer Interaction Histories
Abstract:Large language model (LLM)-powered agents have rapidly evolved from code-completion tools into solvers of complex software engineering tasks. As developers collaborate with coding agents over time, their preferences emerge through repeated interactions and can be used to adapt agent behavior to better meet individual developers' needs. Capturing and reusing these preferences may reduce repeated corrections and improve developer-agent collaboration. Agent skills provide a lightweight mechanism for transferring experience without modifying model parameters. However, existing work primarily focuses on task-specific skills, and it remains unclear whether developer-specific skills distilled from interaction histories can generalize to future tasks. We propose a framework for extracting reusable developer preferences from interaction traces. It first generates personalized skills through rule-based bootstrapping and evidence-grounded refinement, and then evaluates them using a reproducible replay framework with an interactive, trajectory-conditioned LLM-based human developer simulator. We conduct an experiment on 206 real-world developer-agent sessions from 13 developers and compare personalized skills against no-skill, generic-skill, and other-user-skill baselines. Personalized skills provide small and inconsistent improvements over the no-skill baseline, whereas generic skills pooled across developers achieve the largest and most consistent gains. Further analysis suggests that personalized skills become more effective when developer preferences appear frequently, particularly when their histories contain multiple examples relevant to future tasks. These findings provide empirical insights into when developer-specific personalization is effective and demonstrate that broadly transferable procedural knowledge can be more robust than developer-specific preference signals.
Software Engineering (cs.SE); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2608.10319 [cs.SE]
(or arXiv:2608.10319v2 [cs.SE] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.10319 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 341 words
Related coverage
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026
Links #5: 2026/07
LessWrong · Jul 31, 2026

How to apply to AI safety fellowships (and beyond)
LessWrong · Oct 2, 2026

A New Era of Discovery: Google Research at I/O 2026
Google Research · May 28, 2026