跳到主要內容
AI News HubLIVE
來源內容 · 翻譯待補全3 分鐘閱讀

待翻譯:Does a Language Server Save Tokens for Coding Agents? A Measurement Methodology and Preliminary Study

文章摘要

AI 服務暫時不可用,以下為來源摘要,待恢復後補全翻譯:arXiv:2608.13568v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Coding agents spend most of their context budget on retrieval. Lexical retrieval (grep) is universal, instant, and zero-setup, but noisy: it cannot tell a definition from a call from a comment. Semantic retrieval via the Language Server Protocol (LSP) is precise and typed, but needs a running, indexed server and pays a per-symbol round-trip. The claim that semantic retrieval is more token-efficient is, we find, asserted almost everywhere and measured almost nowhere: no public source isolates the LSP-vs-lexical token delta for an agent at equal task-success. This paper formalizes the question with one metric (tokens-to-success), specifies a five-arm ablation isolating semantic retrieval from confounds, maps three p…

來源arXiv Computational Linguistics作者: Pengcheng Xu
待翻譯:Does a Language Server Save Tokens for Coding Agents? A Measurement Methodology and Preliminary Study
報告錯誤

更正渠道尚未開通,可先複製下方文章資訊留存。

查看更正說明
直接讀正文

AI 服務暫時不可用,以下為來源正文,待恢復後補全翻譯。

--> [Submitted on 29 Jun 2026] Title:Does a Language Server Save Tokens for Coding Agents? A Measurement Methodology and Preliminary Study View a PDF of the paper titled Does a Language Server Save Tokens for Coding Agents? A Measurement Methodology and Preliminary Study, by Pengcheng Xu View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:Coding agents spend most of their context budget on retrieval. Lexical retrieval (grep) is universal, instant, and zero-setup, but noisy: it cannot tell a definition from a call from a comment. Semantic retrieval via the Language Server Protocol (LSP) is precise and typed, but needs a running, indexed server and pays a per-symbol round-trip. The claim that semantic retrieval is more token-efficient is, we find, asserted almost everywhere and measured almost nowhere: no public source isolates the LSP-vs-lexical token delta for an agent at equal task-success. This paper formalizes the question with one metric (tokens-to-success), specifies a five-arm ablation isolating semantic retrieval from confounds, maps three pre-stated failure modes onto measurable variables, and reports a preliminary study (Python and TypeScript repos; Claude Opus 4.8, Sonnet 4.6, Haiku 4.5). The answer is conditional and usually negative. On symbol-named localization the LSP costs tokens (+6% to +118%) and the agent ignores it when free. On reference-completeness it buys precision but not token savings and cannot raise the recall ceiling set by agent thoroughness; it saves tokens only for the weakest model. Tool choice is task-dependent: models default to grep on localization (0-6% semantic use) but reach for the LSP about half the time on reference tasks, unprompted. On edits scored by real test execution the gap is starkest: grep solves multi-file renames perfectly, a location-only LSP fails three-quarters of them by missing a call site, and even a complete, index-warmed, text-enriched LSP (each reference's line inline, as production LSP-MCP servers do) recovers most of the gap but cannot close it, since a rename must touch comments and strings that semantic references exclude. The implication is not LSP-always but an adaptive router keyed on task class, model capability, and lexical noise. Comments: 13 pages, 6 figures. Code and data: this https URL Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2608.13568 [cs.CL] (or arXiv:2608.13568v1 [cs.CL] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.13568 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite Submission history From: Pengcheng Xu [view email] [v1] Mon, 29 Jun 2026 04:09:18 UTC (59 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled Does a Language Server Save Tokens for Coding Agents? A Measurement Methodology and Preliminary Study, by Pengcheng Xu View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Current browse context: cs.CL new | recent | 2026-08 Change to browse by: cs cs.AI References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Loading... Data provided by: Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article alphaXiv Toggle alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?) Links to Code Toggle CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?) DagsHub Toggle DagsHub (What is DagsHub?) GotitPub Toggle Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?) Huggingface Toggle Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?) ScienceCast Toggle ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?) Demos Demos Replicate Toggle Replicate (What is Replicate?) Spaces Toggle Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?) Spaces Toggle TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?) Related Papers Recommenders and Search Tools Link to Influence Flower Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?) Core recommender toggle CORE Recommender (What is CORE?) Author Venue Institution Topic About arXivLabs arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs. Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

展開要點與分析

文章情報

工程師進階

要點

  • AI 服務暫時不可用,系統已先保留來源內容與降級元數據。
  • arXiv:2608.13568v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Coding agents spend most of their context budget on retrieval. Lexical retrieval (grep) is universal, instant, and zero-setup, but…

技術影響

可能影響 Agent 架構、工具調用、工作流自動化和產品集成。

要點與分析由自動化流程生成,可能有誤,請結合原始來源核實。