AI coding agents are now submitting pull requests (PRs) to software projects, acting not just as assistants but as autonomous contributors. As these agentic contributions are rapidly increasing across real repositories, little is known about how they behave in practice and why many of them fail to be merged. In this paper, we conduct a large-scale study of 33k agent-authored PRs made by five coding agents across GitHub. (RQ1) We first quantitatively characterize merged and not-merged PRs along four broad dimensions: 1) merge outcomes across task types, 2) code changes, 3) CI build results, and 4) review dynamics. We observe that tasks related to documentation, CI, and build update achieve the highest merge success, whereas performance and bug-fix tasks perform the worst. Not-merged PRs tend to involve larger code changes, touch more files, and often do not pass the project’s CI/CD pipeline validation. (RQ2) To further investigate why some agentic PRs are not merged, we qualitatively analyze 600 PRs to derive a hierarchical taxonomy of rejection patterns. This analysis complements the quantitative findings in RQ1 by uncovering rejection reasons not captured by quantitative metrics, including lack of meaningful reviewer engagement, duplicate PRs, unwanted feature implementations, and agent misalignment. Together, our findings highlight key socio-technical and human-AI collaboration factors that are critical to improving the success of future agentic workflows.

Large language models (LLMs) have become essential in software development, especially for issue resolution. However, despite their widespread use, significant challenges persist in the quality of LLM responses to issue resolution queries. LLM interactions often yield incorrect, incomplete, or ambiguous information, largely due to knowledge gaps in prompt design, which can lead to unproductive exchanges and reduced developer productivity.In this paper, we analyze 433 developer-ChatGPT conversations within GitHub issue threads to examine the impact of prompt knowledge gaps and conversation styles on issue resolution. We identify four main knowledge gaps in developer prompts: Missing Context, Missing Specifications, Multiple Context, and Unclear Instructions. Assuming that conversations within closed issues contributed to successful resolutions while those in open issues did not, we find that ineffective conversations contain knowledge gaps in $44.6 \%$ of prompts, compared to only $12.6 \%$ in effective ones. Additionally, we observe seven distinct conversational styles, with Directive Prompting, Chain of Thought, and Responsive Feedback being the most prevalent. We find that knowledge gaps are present in all styles of conversations, with Missing Context being the most repeated challenge developers face in issue-resolution conversations.Based on our analysis, we identify key textual and code-related heuristics—Specificity, Contextual Richness, and Clarity—that are associated with successful issue closure and help assess prompt quality. These heuristics lay the foundation for an automated tool that can dynamically flag unclear prompts and suggest structured improvements. To test feasibility, we developed a lightweight browser extension prototype for detecting prompt gaps, that can be easily adapted to other tools within developer workflows.

In the dynamic landscape of open source software (OSS) development, understanding and addressing incivility within issue discussions is crucial for fostering healthy and productive collaborations. This paper presents a curated dataset of 404 locked GitHub issue discussion threads and 5961 individual comments, collected from 213 OSS projects. We annotated the comments with various categories of incivility using Tone Bearing Discussion Features (TBDFs), and, for each issue thread, we annotated the triggers, targets, and consequences of incivility. We observed that Bitter frustration, Impatience, and Mocking are the most prevalent TBDFs exhibited in our dataset. The most common triggers, targets, and consequences of incivility include Failed use of tool/code or error messages, People, and Discontinued further discussion, respectively. This dataset can serve as a valuable resource for analyzing incivility in OSS and improving automated tools to detect and mitigate such behavior.

The purpose of scholarly peer review is to evaluate the quality of scientific manuscripts. However, study after study demonstrates that peer review neither effectively nor reliably assesses research quality. Empirical standards attempt to address this problem by modelling a scientific community's expectations for each kind of empirical study conducted in that community. This should enhance not only the quality of research but also the reliability and predictability of peer review, as scientists adopt the standards in both their researcher and reviewer roles. However, these improvements depend on the quality and adoption of the standards. This tutorial will therefore present the empirical standard for mining software repositories, both to communicate its contents and to get feedback from the attendees. The tutorial will be organized into three parts: (1) brief overview of the empirical standards project; (2) detailed presentation of the repository mining standard; (3) discussion and suggestions for improvement.

Today, software developers work on complex and fast-moving projects that often require instant assistance from other domain and subject matter experts. Chat servers such as Discord facilitate live communication and collaboration among developers all over the world. With numerous topics discussed in parallel, mining and analyzing the chat data of these platforms would offer researchers and tool makers opportunities to develop software tools and services such as automated virtual assistants, chat bots, chat summarization techniques, Q&A thesaurus, and more.

More than ever, developers are participating in public chat communities to ask and answer software development questions. With over ten million daily active users, Slack is one of the most popular chat platforms, hosting many active channels focused on software development technologies, e.g., python, react. Prior studies have shown that public Slack chat transcripts contain valuable information, which could provide support for improving automatic software maintenance tools or help researchers understand developer struggles or concerns.

Modern software development communities are increasingly social. Popular chat platforms such as Slack host public chat communities that focus on specific development topics such as Python or Ruby-on-Rails. Conversations in these public chats often follow a Q&A format, with someone seeking information and others providing answers in chat form. In this paper, we describe an exploratory study into the potential use-fulness and challenges of mining developer Q&A conversations for supporting software maintenance and evolution tools. We designed the study to investigate the availability of information that has been successfully mined from other developer communications, particularly Stack Overflow. We also analyze characteristics of chat conversations that might inhibit accurate automated analysis. Our results indicate the prevalence of useful information, including API mentions and code snippets with descriptions, and several hurdles that need to be overcome to automate mining that information.

The availability of large corpora of online software-related documents today presents an opportunity to use machine learning to improve integrated development environments by first automatically collecting code examples along with associated descriptions. Digital libraries of computer science research and education conference and journal articles can be a rich source for code examples that are used to motivate or explain particular concepts or issues. Because they are used as examples in an article, these code examples are accompanied by descriptions of their functionality, properties, or other associated information expressed in natural language text. Identifying code segments in these documents is relatively straightforward, thus this paper tackles the problem of extracting the natural language text that is associated with each code segment in an article. We present and evaluate a set of heuristics that address the challenges of the text often not being colocated with the code segment as in developer communications such as online forums.