How Developers Experience Debugging Unfamiliar Codebases with Code Tours Generated and Evaluated by Local LLMs
Martin Balfroid, Julien Albert, Dzenatan Aliti, Xavier Devroey, Benoît Vanderose
Abstract
Code tours are interactive, onboarding documentation to guide developers through a codebase. Large Language Models (LLMs) can automatically synthesize code tours. Prior work on code tour generation has not studied developer experience or trust calibration when debugging unfamiliar codebases with code tours generated and evaluated by open-weight LLMs. This study surveys how the properties of components in open-weight LLM-authored code tours influence developers' experiences when debugging unfamiliar codebases. We built a pipeline that generated and evaluated code tours from real reproducible bugs. 26 developers with varying backgrounds participated in a user study. In total, 26 code tours were authored from real Java bugs mined from 2025 GitHub commits, with each tour independently judged by two different LLMs, resulting in 52 evaluated configurations. Participants thought aloud as they explored each tour. Three authors qualitatively coded the interviews to identify recurring themes. Developers generally preferred tours that scaled detail with the code length, avoided merely restating code, were easily scannable, and adopted a guiding tone. However, some preferences were mutually exclusive, such as the use of imperative mood. Stack traces were often insufficient to identify all steps developers found relevant. Developers also trusted descriptions they perceived as human-written more than those they believed were AI-generated. Finally, LLM-generated annotations of tour quality were unreliable: sycophancy, confabulation, and incoherence were pervasive. This work lays a basis for future research on fine-tuning open-weight models for code tour generation, personalizing generation to accommodate diverging preferences, selecting relevant steps beyond stack traces, calibrating users' trust to avoid both disuse and misuse, and improving open-weight LLMs' ability to be more trustworthy evaluators
Create a lesson
Related papers
ProgramDistill: From Interactive Web Apps to Verifiable Reference-Guided SWE Tasks
Jeonghye Kim, Minseon Kim, Young Jin Kim et al.
Evaluating the Health of Open-Source Smart City Platforms
Rodrigo Bravo Simões, Fernando Brito e Abreu, Vasco Amaral
From Component Snapshots to Lifecycle Traces: Agent-Based Software Composition Analysis
Chaofan Li, Zhengduo Xue, Chengxiang Li et al.
A Study on the Impact of Natural Language Differences in Prompts on Automatic Code Generation Using LLMs
Haruka Tokumasu, Masanari Kondo, Alexander Serebrenik et al.
A Study of the Reliability of Agentic AI-Generated Programs
Ayesha Shafique, Barton P. MIller, Elisa R. Heymann
Relationally Guided Use Case Modeling with LLMs
Guangyu Wang, Bangqi Li, Ji Wu et al.