(Im)Paired Programming: Coding Agents Improve Productivity but Harm Understanding
Summary
A study with 54 students finds that coding agents improve task completion but harm code comprehension and the ability to extend code without assistance, raising concerns about developer understanding.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 07/30/26, 09:57 AM
# (Im)Paired Programming: Coding Agents Improve Productivity but Harm Understanding Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.26375](https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.26375) [View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.26375) > Abstract:Coding agents \(e\.g\., Cursor\) improve developer productivity by optimizing task completion, but shifting users from writing code to prompting and reviewing may harm their understanding, impeding oversight, learning, and communication\. To probe this, we have 54 students create a website with one of two AI systems: an agent that edits user code; or a chatbot where users write code alone or adapt generic code snippets\. We test understanding via comprehension questions and a task where users extend their code without agents, showing: \(1\) While agents aid initial task completion, they harm users' code comprehension and thus do not prepare users to extend their code; \(2\) Low\-effort agent interaction types, like copy\+paste prompts and auto\-accepted edits, are linked with lower comprehension; and \(3\) Despite self\-reported weaker understanding, users still prefer coding agents because they are quick and easy to use\. While users stay in the loop for coding workflows, understanding should not be forgotten\. Towards this goal, we distill our analyses into future research directions for coding agent developers: dissuading low\-effort prompting, creating readable code, and promoting active engagement\. ## Submission history From: Nishant Balepur \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/558b7f54/2607.26375)\] **\[v1\]**Wed, 29 Jul 2026 01:23:04 UTC \(43,006 KB\)
Similar Articles
Coding with Agents
Coding with Agents explores how AI agents can assist developers in writing code, automating tasks, and improving productivity.
Are coding agents much better at starting projects than fixing real codebases?
An observation that coding agents perform well on new projects but often struggle with existing codebases, where the need for minimal changes and understanding of hidden dependencies limits their effectiveness.
AI-coding agents kill team collaboration
The article discusses how AI-powered coding agents may undermine team collaboration in software development, highlighting potential negative impacts on code quality and communication.
Spec-driven agentic coding is quietly making us worse at the job of supervising agents
The author argues that heavily relying on AI coding agents causes human developers to lose critical technical intuition and code review skills over time, proposing measures like mandatory hands-on coding days to maintain supervisory competence.
Are coding agents creating a new review problem?
The article discusses how while coding agents can effectively generate code, they introduce a new bottleneck in reviewing and trusting the changes, questioning whether agents reduce or shift the review workload.