Evaluating and Improving Automated Repository-Level Rust Issue Resolution with LLM-based Agents
Jiahong Xiang, Wenxiao He, Xihua Wang, Hongliang Tian, Yuqun Zhang
Abstract
The Rust programming language presents a steep learning curve and significant coding challenges, making the automation of issue resolution essential for its broader adoption. Recently, LLMpowered code agents have shown remarkable success in resolving complex software engineering tasks, yet their application to Rust has been limited by the absence of a large-scale, repository-level benchmark. To bridge this gap, we introduce Rust-SWE-bench, a benchmark comprising 500 real-world, repository-level software engineering tasks from 34 diverse and popular Rust repositories. We then perform a comprehensive study on Rust-SWE-bench with four representative agents and four state-of-the-art LLMs to establish a foundational understanding of their capabilities and limitations in the Rust ecosystem.
Our extensive study reveals that while ReAct-style agents are promising, i.e., resolving up to 21.2% of issues, they are limited by two primary challenges: comprehending repository-wide code structure and complying with Rust's strict type and trait semantics. We also find that issue reproduction is rather critical for task resolution. Inspired by these findings, we propose RustForger, a novel agentic approach that integrates an automated test environment setup with a Rust metaprogramming-driven dynamic tracing strategy to facilitate reliable issue reproduction and dynamic analysis. The evaluation shows that RustForger using Claude-Sonnet-3.7 significantly outperforms all baselines, resolving 28.6% of tasks on Rust-SWE-bench, i.e., a 34.9% improvement over the strongest baseline, and, in aggregate, uniquely solves 46 tasks that no other agent could solve across all adopted advanced LLMs.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on27
- SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-world Github Issues?Carlos E. Jimenez, John Yang, Alexander Wettig, Shunyu Yao et al.ICLR 2024 · 2,082 citations
- SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software EngineeringJohn Yang, Carlos E. Jimenez, Alexander Wettig, Kilian Lieret et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 2,059 citations
- Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentionWoosuk Kwon, Zhuohan Li, Siyuan Zhuang, Ying Sheng et al.SOSP 2023 · 1,016 citations
- Executable Code Actions Elicit Better LLM AgentsXingyao Wang, Yangyi Chen, Lifan Yuan, Yizhe Zhang et al.ICML 2024 · 436 citations
- Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating ModelsShraddha Barke, Michael B. James, Nadia PolikarpovaOOPSLA 2023 · 408 citations
Related papers
- Can Agent Fix Agent Issues?Alfin Wijaya Rahardja, Junwei Liu, Weitong Chen, Zhenpeng Chen et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 4 citations
- Agent-Based Ensemble Reasoning for Repository-Level Issue ResolutionZhao Tian, Pengfei Gao, Junjie Chen, Chao PengICSE 2026
- Beyond Final Code: A Process-Oriented Error Analysis of Software Development Agents in Real-World GitHub ScenariosZhi Chen, Wei Ma, Lingxiao JiangICSE 2026
- SWE-rebench V2: Language-Agnostic SWE Task Collection at ScaleIbragim Badertdinov, Maksim Nekrashevich, Anton Shevtsov, Aleksandr GolubevICML 2026 · 13 citations
- SWT-Bench: Testing and Validating Real-World Bug-Fixes with Code AgentsNiels Mündler, Mark Niklas Müller, Jingxuan He, Martin T. VechevNeurIPS 2024 · 172 citations
