RefactorAssist: Agentic Refinement for Reliable Code Refactoring

Code refactoring aims to enhance the internal structure of source code without affecting its functional behavior. The recent advancements of Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated potential for automating software engineering tasks, such as code refactoring. However, the refactorings produced by LLMs often introduce subtle errors, leading to functional behavior changes and failed unit tests, which limit their practical adoption. To address the limitations of LLM-generated refactorings, we analyze the root causes of their failures and develop the RefactorAssist agent to improve the functional correctness of LLM-generated refactorings. To this end, we use 10 open-source Java projects with their native test suites and manually evaluate why LLM-generated refactorings fail unit tests. We then design an agentic approach that leverages unit-test logs, error explanations, project context retrieval, and code diffs to guide the iterative refactoring. Our findings show that the main reasons for failure are context misunderstanding/hallucination (24.3%), incorrect or inconsistent renaming (15.3%), adding new functionality or variables (13.7%), code incompleteness (11.3%), syntax and structural errors (9.7%), edge cases not handled (9%), improper type handling (8.7%), and variables outside scope (8%). To make our approach cost-effective, RefactorAssist first applies a static repair step for missing imports, unbalanced brackets, and compilation errors without LLMs. For remaining failures, RefactorAssist incorporates error logs and code diffs, achieving up to a 70.8% repair rate on the remaining failures and a 94.2% cumulative pass rate under the best-performing configuration. These results indicate that static checks and test-guided, context-aware agentic repair can increase the reliability of LLM-generated refactorings, bringing them closer to practical integration within developer workflows.

Never Come Up Empty: Adaptive HyDE Retrieval for Improving LLM Developer Support

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in assisting developers with code-related questions; however, LLMs carry the risk of generating unreliable answers. To address this, Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has been proposed to reduce the unreliability (i.e., hallucinations) of LLMs. However, designing effective pipelines remains challenging due to numerous design choices. In this paper, we construct a retrieval corpus of over 3 million Java and Python related Stack Overflow posts with accepted answers, and explore various RAG pipeline designs to answer developer questions, evaluating their effectiveness in generating accurate and reliable responses. More specifically, we (1) design and evaluate 7 different RAG pipelines and 63 pipeline variants to answer questions that have historically similar matches, and (2) address new questions without any close prior matches by automatically lowering the similarity threshold during retrieval, thereby increasing the chance of finding partially relevant context and improving coverage for unseen cases. We find that implementing a RAG pipeline combining hypothetical-documentation-embedding (HyDE) with the full-answer context performs best in retrieving and answering similarcontent for Stack Overflow questions. Finally, we apply our optimal RAG pipeline to 4 open-source LLMs and compare the results to their zero-shot performance. Our findings show that RAG with our optimal RAG pipeline consistently outperforms zero-shot baselines across models, achieving higher scores for helpfulness, correctness, and detail with LLM-as-a-judge. These findings demonstrate that our optimal RAG pipelines robustly enhance answer quality for a wide range of developer queries including both previously seen and novel questions across different LLMs