{
  "schema_version": 1,
  "builder_plan": {
    "scenario": "Your coding assistant makes changes that still need substantial repair before merging.",
    "change": "Try the technique on held-out issues from a repository with reliable tests.",
    "baseline": "The same coding agent, repository snapshot, tools, and token budget.",
    "steps": [
      "Locate the paper's implementation and check its license, model support, data needs, and hardware requirements. Stop here if you cannot obtain the required artifacts.",
      "Save a small set of representative product tasks and expected outcomes. Keep evaluation tasks out of any training or tuning, and choose quality and cost limits before running.",
      "Run the baseline and the proposed change on identical inputs. Keep other settings fixed and repeat paired runs to expose variation.",
      "Save per-task outputs, failures, timings, and all usage costs. Review regressions before expanding the test."
    ],
    "measure": "Correct patches, regression failures, human repair time, and total cost per accepted change.",
    "decision": "Keep the change only if it meets your preselected quality and latency limits and improves the metric you care about after setup and operating costs. Otherwise retain the baseline. This is an exploration plan, not a validated recommendation."
  },
  "builder_review": null,
  "arxiv_id": "2610.21372",
  "title": "Agentic Dependency Transformations: Lessons from an Exploratory Case Study of Flask",
  "summary": "The technique replaces reliance on third-party libraries by having a coding agent reimplement required dependency functionality as local code, in place of manual dependency management or vendoring. It costs agent compute (API tokens), adds maintained local code that must be kept correct and secure, and demands explicit contracts, provenance tracking, and independent validation effort. It can fail through incomplete dependency discovery, subtle behavioral divergence from the original library, license or provenance violations, and unverified correctness when context given to the agent is insufficient.",
  "rationale": "This is an exploratory single-case study with no quantified gains, so it defines an emerging direction and validation requirements rather than a production-ready practice for a constrained team.",
  "technique": "Agentic dependency transformation (local reimplementation)",
  "family": "agentes_de_codigo",
  "recommendation": "observar",
  "published": "2026-10-15",
  "as_of": "2026-10-18",
  "editorial_status": "indexed",
  "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.21372",
  "independent_implementations": 0,
  "total_implementations": 1,
  "stars": 4,
  "citations": 0,
  "claims": [
    {
      "claim_id": "claim-01",
      "statement": "The technique replaces reliance on third-party libraries by having a coding agent reimplement required dependency functionality as local code, in place of manual dependency management or vendoring. It costs agent compute (API tokens), adds maintained local code that must be kept correct and secure, and demands explicit contracts, provenance tracking, and independent validation effort. It can fail through incomplete dependency discovery, subtle behavioral divergence from the original library, license or provenance violations, and unverified correctness when context given to the agent is insufficient.",
      "basis": "inferred",
      "result": "",
      "baseline": "",
      "conditions": "",
      "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.21372",
      "source_page": null,
      "source_excerpt": ""
    }
  ],
  "exposure_map": [
    {
      "dimension": "quality",
      "basis": "not_evaluated",
      "finding": "",
      "interpretation": "",
      "limitation": "",
      "next_check": "",
      "source_url": "",
      "source_page": null,
      "source_excerpt": ""
    },
    {
      "dimension": "compute",
      "basis": "not_evaluated",
      "finding": "",
      "interpretation": "",
      "limitation": "",
      "next_check": "",
      "source_url": "",
      "source_page": null,
      "source_excerpt": ""
    },
    {
      "dimension": "latency",
      "basis": "not_evaluated",
      "finding": "",
      "interpretation": "",
      "limitation": "",
      "next_check": "",
      "source_url": "",
      "source_page": null,
      "source_excerpt": ""
    },
    {
      "dimension": "operations",
      "basis": "not_evaluated",
      "finding": "",
      "interpretation": "",
      "limitation": "",
      "next_check": "",
      "source_url": "",
      "source_page": null,
      "source_excerpt": ""
    },
    {
      "dimension": "compatibility",
      "basis": "not_evaluated",
      "finding": "",
      "interpretation": "",
      "limitation": "",
      "next_check": "",
      "source_url": "",
      "source_page": null,
      "source_excerpt": ""
    },
    {
      "dimension": "security",
      "basis": "not_evaluated",
      "finding": "",
      "interpretation": "",
      "limitation": "",
      "next_check": "",
      "source_url": "",
      "source_page": null,
      "source_excerpt": ""
    },
    {
      "dimension": "data_and_training",
      "basis": "not_evaluated",
      "finding": "",
      "interpretation": "",
      "limitation": "",
      "next_check": "",
      "source_url": "",
      "source_page": null,
      "source_excerpt": ""
    },
    {
      "dimension": "reproducibility",
      "basis": "not_evaluated",
      "finding": "",
      "interpretation": "",
      "limitation": "",
      "next_check": "",
      "source_url": "",
      "source_page": null,
      "source_excerpt": ""
    }
  ],
  "risks": [],
  "minimum_test": [],
  "open_questions": [],
  "independent_tests": [],
  "lab_reproductions": [],
  "report_available": false,
  "validation_tier": "unknown",
  "evidence_tier": "unknown",
  "infrastructure_basis": "unknown",
  "equations": [],
  "equations_status": "not_fetched",
  "core_kind": "",
  "equations_fetched_at": "",
  "equations_source_url": "",
  "equations_source_sha256": "",
  "exposures_reviewed_at": "",
  "exposures_source_sha256": ""
}