arXiv preprint ·
ParanoiaEval: Benchmarking Unnecessary Defensive Work in Agentic Coding
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
As coding agents increasingly undertake real-world work autonomously, judging whether their risk treatments are warranted has become important. Existing work evaluates related agent behaviors from separate perspectives, but lacks a systematic framework for unifying these behaviors. To bridge this gap, we introduce ParanoiaEval, the first benchmark for unified evaluation of risk-treatment capabilities in coding agents. Grounded in the well-established Avoidance-Transfer-Mitigation-Acceptance framework in software engineering risk management, ParanoiaEval operationalizes its 4 fundamental treatments for coding-agent settings and contains 200 evidence-controlled repository-level task pairs, each differing only in treatment-defining evidence. We further introduce dedicated metrics for risk-treatment violations and evidence responsiveness, using a human-calibrated agentic judge for reliable evaluation. Large-scale experiments on 8 representative models and a post-hoc human study reveal that (I) unnecessary risk treatment occurs in 11.2%-58.7% of runs despite explicit evidence, with substantial variation across agent configurations; (II) stronger task capability does not ensure more appropriate risk treatment, while treatment violations substantially harm developers' experience, establishing risk treatment as an independent capability dimension; and (III) agents exhibit systematic patterns consistent with established risk-management findings, suggesting that knowledge from human practice can guide the diagnosis and improvement of this capability.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Artificial Intelligence
The EPIC Framework for Spec-Driven Development
Who Broke Me? Execution-Guided Repair of Behavioral Dependency Breaks
CheckerBench: Can Long-Horizon Agents Synthesize Static-Analysis Checkers?
Beyond FAIR: A Fitness Function Framework for Sustainable Research Software
CISB-Bench: An Auditable Source--IR Dataset of Compiler-Introduced Security Bugs
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.