Abstract:Technical documentation is written for human developers, but an increasing share of software changes is now authored by autonomous coding agents. Which documents they consult, when, and what follows remain unknown. We conduct a behaviour-grounded study of agent-documentation interaction across two public datasets: 557 agentic coding sessions from SWE-chat, yielding 94,813 development events including 3,033 documentation interactions; and 33,097 agentic pull requests from AIDev, with 690,260 classified file-level change records. Four findings challenge current documentation practice. First, agents' documentation work is dominated by agent-facing artefacts: instruction files and working notes account for 60.5% of all documentation interactions, versus 10.6% for classical technical documentation and 1.3% for API references. Second, the link between consultation and code editing is unresolved: the adjacent transition probability is 0.002 and the unadjusted three-event lift 1.05, whereas a stage-adjusted model places it above unity (OR 1.33 [1.09, 1.62]); documentation creation is elevated unadjusted (lift 1.67) but its adjusted interval includes unity. Third, no explicit documentation-based validation sequence was observed, and consultation is associated with less immediate testing (lift 0.23, cluster CI 0.08-0.45; adjusted OR 0.39 [0.25, 0.60]). Fourth, consultation is self-initiated (70.2%) far more often than failure-driven (7.5%), and documentation trails code: among multi-commit pull requests changing both, code is touched first 4.7x more often. From these traces we derive a descriptive model of agent-documentation interaction as a two-lobed cycle rather than a linear journey, and show that two widely assumed properties of "agent-friendly" documentation - actionability and verifiability - lack consistent behavioural support. We release our pipeline, coding scheme, and event-level data.
Abstract:Autonomous 3D indoor scene synthesis breaks down in non-convex rooms with tightly coupled spatial constraints. Data-driven generators lack topological priors for long-horizon planning, while iterative agents fragment semantics and become geometrically brittle. We present ZoneMaestro, a unified framework that shifts the paradigm from object-centric synthesis to Zone-Graph Orchestration. By internalizing a novel zone-based logic, ZoneMaestro translates high-level semantic intent into functional zones and topological constraints, enabling robust adaptation to diverse architectural forms. To support this, we construct Zone-Scene-10K, a large-scale dataset enriched with explicit Zone-Graph annotations. We further introduce an Alternating Alignment Strategy that cycles between reasoning internalization and Zone-Aware Group Relative Policy Optimization (Z-GRPO), effectively reconciling the tension between semantic richness and geometric validity without relying on external physics engines. To rigorously evaluate spatial intelligence beyond convex primitives, we formally define the task of Intricate Spatial Orchestration and release SCALE, a stress-test benchmark for irregular indoor scenarios with complex, dense spatial relations. Extensive experiments demonstrate that ZoneMaestro resolves the density-safety dichotomy, significantly outperforming state-of-the-art baselines in both structural coherence and intent adherence.