ANCHOR: Assessing Naturalistic Constraint Hierarchies and Ordering in Repository-Grounded Agentic Coding
cs.CL
Submitted: 2026-10-12
Updated: 2026-10-14
Code: https://github.com/bupterlxp/ANCHOR
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: For repository-grounded coding agents, a functionally correct patch is not necessarily an acceptable one: developers also constrain how the task must be carried out-modification scope, workflow
Terminology
Abstract
For repository-grounded coding agents, a functionally correct patch is not necessarily an acceptable one: developers also constrain how the task must be carried out-modification scope, workflow order, validation, tool use, and reporting. This capability, which we call engineering constraint following, remains largely invisible to current evaluations. We introduce ANCHOR (Assessing Naturalistic Constraint Hierarchies and Ordering in Repository-Grounded Agentic Coding), a benchmark built on naturalistic, multilingual repository tasks spanning eight language groups. ANCHOR combines (i) a hierarchical taxonomy of 10 categories and 78 leaf types distilled from real developer interactions, (ii) an automated pipeline that instantiates task-grounded atomic constraints and composes them into typed AND/THEN/PRIORITY relations, and (iii) a trajectory-grounded evaluation framework that checks both the code diff and the execution trajectory with rule-based and LLM judges. Across 19 agent configurations spanning 2 scaffolds and 10 foundation models on 358 tasks, the strongest measured system, Claude Opus 4.8 under Cline, reaches 70.1% atomic compliance and 63.7% relation compliance, while 19.0% of tasks pass every scored checklist item under the strict all-item FCCR criterion. A five-engineer audit of constraints from 50 instances reports 94% feasibility, 94% repository consistency, and 96% realism. In the primary paired set (14 configurations), the mean signed change in task completion after adding constraints is +0.7 percentage points; individual changes vary in both directions. These results distinguish functional success from constraint compliance, with failures concentrated in workflow ordering, tool-use discipline, and reporting, and substantial interactions between models and scaffolds.
Sources
- SWE-rebench V2: Language-Agnostic SWE Task Collection at Scale
- SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?
- OctoBench: Benchmarking Scaffold-Aware Instruction Following in Repository-Grounded Agentic Coding
- CIFE: Code Instruction-Following Evaluation
- Prompting Large Language Models to Tackle the Full Software Development Lifecycle: A Case Study
- DeepSeek-V3.2: Pushing the Frontier of Open Large Language Models
- Generalizing Verifiable Instruction Following
- Kimi K2.5: Visual Agentic Intelligence
- SWE-EVO: Benchmarking Coding Agents in Long-Horizon Software Evolution Scenarios
- Benchmarking Complex Instruction-Following with Multiple Constraints Composition
- SWE-Compass: Towards Unified Evaluation of Agentic Coding Abilities for Large Language Models
- $\tau$-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains
- Multi-SWE-bench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Issue Resolving
- GLM-5: from Vibe Coding to Agentic Engineering
- Inverse IFEval: Can LLMs Unlearn Stubborn Training Conventions to Follow Real Instructions?
- IHEval: Evaluating Language Models on Following the Instruction Hierarchy
- Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Models
- FeatureBench: Benchmarking Agentic Coding for Complex Feature Development
Related papers
- Exploring Solution Divergence and Its Effect on Large Language Model Problem Solving
- Ishigaki-IDS-Bench: A Benchmark for Generating Information Delivery Specification from BIM Information Requirements
- Subliminal Steering: Stronger Encoding of Hidden Signals
- MedStruct-S: A Benchmark for Key Discovery, Key-Conditioned QA and Semi-Structured Extraction from OCR Clinical Reports
- The End of Transformers? On Challenging Attention and the Rise of Sub-Quadratic Architectures
- Untangling the Mechanisms of Misleading Context in Medical Question Answering