Source note

Squeez: Task-Conditioned Tool-Output Pruning for Coding Agents

Coding AgentsContext PruningTool Output ExtractionCode IntelligenceSwe Bench

Squeez targets a narrow but useful coding-agent task: given a query and one tool output, keep only the smallest verbatim block that matters for the next step. The paper releases a benchmark for this task and shows that a LoRA-tuned Qwen 3.5 2B model beats larger zero-shot models and simple pruning heuristics.

  • Coding agents repeatedly reread long tool outputs such as file reads, logs, stack traces, grep hits, and git history, even though only a small part matters for the next action.
  • This wastes context and compute inside agent loops, especially for software debugging and repository work where relevant evidence may sit anywhere in the output.
  • The paper focuses on single-observation pruning: extract the smallest verbatim evidence block for a focused query, so the agent keeps useful lines and drops the rest.
  • The authors define task-conditioned tool-output pruning: input is a short query plus one raw tool observation; output is one or more contiguous spans from the original text.
  • They build a dataset of 11,477 examples across 27 tool types, combining 9,205 SWE-bench-derived examples, 1,697 synthetic positives, and 575 synthetic negatives; the test set has 618 manually reviewed examples.
  • Labels are created with a two-stage teacher pipeline using openai/gpt-oss-120b, which writes a focused extraction query and selects the smallest supporting spans; released labels map back to raw text so targets stay verbatim.
  • The model is Qwen 3.5 2B fine-tuned with LoRA to output extracted text inside <relevant_lines> tags. Evaluation uses line-level recall, F1, exact match, and compression.
  • Baselines include zero-shot Qwen 3.5 35B A3B, Kimi K2, unfine-tuned Qwen 3.5 2B, and heuristic methods BM25, First-N, Last-N, and Random.
  • On the 618-example held-out test set, Squeez-2B reaches 0.86 recall, 0.80 precision, 0.80 F1, 0.79 strict F1, 0.49 exact match, and 0.92 compression, which means it removes 92% of input tokens.
  • Against the main zero-shot large-model baseline, Qwen 3.5 35B A3B, Squeez-2B improves recall from 0.75 to 0.86 and F1 from 0.73 to 0.80 at the same 0.92 compression.
  • Against the unfine-tuned Qwen 3.5 2B base model, Squeez-2B improves recall from 0.53 to 0.86 and F1 from 0.55 to 0.80.
  • Heuristic pruning is much weaker: BM25 gets 0.22 recall and 0.23 F1 at 0.90 compression; First-N gets 0.14 recall; Last-N gets 0.05 recall.
  • On 59 negative test examples, Squeez-2B returns empty output 80% of the time, versus 7% for Qwen 35B, which shows better handling of cases where no relevant evidence exists.
  • The paper does not report end-to-end agent task-completion gains, so the main claimed breakthrough is strong evidence preservation under heavy compression on a new benchmark for coding-agent tool outputs.