Skill Dreaming: Evolving Repository Skills through Pull Request Streams
arXiv:2610.36188v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on reusable skills for complex software engineering tasks, making skill libraries essential for repository development and maintenance. However, repository-specific skills must evolve with changing code structures, implementation conventions, and maintenance requirements. Pull requests (PRs) provide a natural source of such knowledge by recording how repositories evolve through implementation and
Read original source
Source record
Research analysis
Research claim
Paper identifier: 2610.36188. Source account: arXiv:2610.36188v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on reusable skills for complex software engineering tasks, making skill libraries essential for repository development and maintenance. However, repository-specific skills must evolve with changing code structures, implementation conventions, and maintenance requirements. Pull requests (PRs) provide a natural source of such knowledge by recording how repositories evolve through implementation and
Evaluation record
Recent records to compare: “Who Should Know What? Empirical Information Design for Multi-Agent LLM Economies” (arXiv, Nov 6, 2026); “Don't Prompt Your Agents. Equip Them: Skillware as a Modular Standard for Sovereign, Auditable, and Deterministic Capability Execution for Logical Sys” (arXiv, Nov 6, 2026). Shared themes are navigation hints; they have not been verified as the same need or independent corroboration.
What the result supports
Interpret results only for the reported model version, task, data and inference budget. Community votes, downloads or a benchmark position do not establish reliability in a different workflow.
Validity gaps
Check sample selection, baseline configuration, uncertainty, contamination risk, negative results and access to code or weights. No reproduction by WeWorkBuddy is recorded here.
Verification plan
Read the paper or model card and its evaluation appendix. Reproduce one bounded result against the stated baseline, then test a representative user task and record where the conclusion fails.