← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2610.37224 · v1
Spine: Compiling Subtask Trees into Structured Context for Long-Horizon Coding Agents
首次提交 2026-10-27 21:33
版本更新 2026-10-27 21:33
雷达观测 2026-10-29 00:35
摘要
Long-horizon coding tasks contain nested subtasks. Typically, agents record interactions sequentially into a growing history, causing context inflation and performance degradation. Compressing or trimming the history without explicit subtask boundaries can discard information needed by unfinished subtasks. Conversely, recursive subagent delegation isolates completed subtasks through child agents by assigning every subtask boundary to delegation, which conflates subtask granularity with executing agent choice, adding execution and coordination overhead. We introduce Spine, an interface and runtime that align model context with subtask nesting and completion. An agent declares explicit subtask boundaries through work scopes, allowing the same agent to execute nested subtasks inline while reserving delegation for independent parallel tasks. The runtime organizes execution in SpineTree, a persistent tree recording subtask relations, local interactions, completion states, and returned results. Before each model call, it compiles the tree into model context just in time, retaining unfinished subtasks' interactions and replacing completed subtasks' details with their results, while preserving prefix-cache reuse. We integrate Spine into Codex to build SpineCodex. With GPT-5.6 Sol, compared with native Codex, SpineCodex improves SWE-Milestone Score by 11.8% while reducing total cost by 32.4%, improves the average ProgramBench test-pass rate by 17.3%, and improves Mean@5 on eight of the ten evaluated FrontierSWE tasks. On SWE-Milestone, it also achieves a comparable Score to Recursive Subagent at 73.7% lower total cost. We also integrate Spine into Pi through a reusable software package: with Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen 3.8 27B, it improves SWE-Milestone Score by 9.5-17.5% and the average ProgramBench test-pass rate by 4.3-8.7% compared with native Pi.
作者备注：22 pages, 9 figures, 7 tables
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v1 · 2026-10-27 21:33 · 最新观测版本
Spine: Compiling Subtask Trees into Structured Context for Long-Horizon Coding Agents
Long-horizon coding tasks contain nested subtasks. Typically, agents record interactions sequentially into a growing history, causing context inflation and performance degradation. Compressing or trimming the history without explicit subtask boundaries can discard information needed by unfinished subtasks. Conversely, recursive subagent delegation isolates completed subtasks through child agents by assigning every subtask boundary to delegation, which conflates subtask granularity with executing agent choice, adding execution and coordination overhead. We introduce Spine, an interface and runtime that align model context with subtask nesting and completion. An agent declares explicit subtask boundaries through work scopes, allowing the same agent to execute nested subtasks inline while reserving delegation for independent parallel tasks. The runtime organizes execution in SpineTree, a persistent tree recording subtask relations, local interactions, completion states, and returned results. Before each model call, it compiles the tree into model context just in time, retaining unfinished subtasks' interactions and replacing completed subtasks' details with their results, while preserving prefix-cache reuse. We integrate Spine into Codex to build SpineCodex. With GPT-5.6 Sol, compared with native Codex, SpineCodex improves SWE-Milestone Score by 11.8% while reducing total cost by 32.4%, improves the average ProgramBench test-pass rate by 17.3%, and improves Mean@5 on eight of the ten evaluated FrontierSWE tasks. On SWE-Milestone, it also achieves a comparable Score to Recursive Subagent at 73.7% lower total cost. We also integrate Spine into Pi through a reusable software package: with Gemini 3.8 Flash and Qwen 3.8 27B, it improves SWE-Milestone Score by 9.5-17.5% and the average ProgramBench test-pass rate by 4.3-8.7% compared with native Pi.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗