Catalog Systems Recent method papers — theorized, no distinct product RL Developer Memory

RL Developer Memory

https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.01567

Local-first MCP architecture for RL coding agents that treats memory selection as a logged contextual decision process. Three MCP tools: issue_match (ranks candidates + records telemetry), issue_feedback (maps raw labels to bounded rewards), issue_record_resolution (links resolutions to retrieval events). Deterministic ranker in production while a contextual-bandit residual policy runs in shadow mode behind off-policy-evaluation gates.

Active · Verified 2026-10-28 · fresh as of 2026-10-28 · 32 cited facts, 0 with a third-party source · Suggest a correction

At a glance

Type
Safety-gated MCP architecture for RL coding-agent memory vendor fix
Tier
T4
Section
Recent method papers — theorized, no distinct product
Created
2026-05-02 (arXiv submission) vendor fix
Latest release
not applicable — research paper fix
License
not applicable — research paper (license tied to author repo) fix
GitHub
searched not found vendor fix
Pricing
not applicable — research paper fix
Funding
not applicable — research paper fix
Freshness
2026-10-28 fix
Layer
agent-infra repo fix

Memory taxonomy

storage
kv
retrieval
similarity
persistence
long-term
update
reward-gated
unit
episode
governance
user-controllable
conflict
deterministic-ranker

When to use

Optimised for: auditable memory-control architecture with explicit claim boundaries; 80.0% expected-decision accuracy and 100.0% hard-negative suppression in same-commit comparison

Anti-fit: active learned-policy deployment unsupported (only shadow-mode); official-client MCP interoperability unavailable; full-configuration latency regression observed; 40 residual non-RL failures remain

Pros & cons

Pros

Treats memory selection as a logged contextual decision process — first paper to apply OPE/contextual-bandit framework to coding-agent memory; deterministic ranker in production + shadow learner is a deployable safety pattern; 100% hard-negative suppression on benchmark.

Cons

Single-author preprint (not peer-reviewed); evaluation is internal 200-case dataset only — no SWE-Bench or external corpus; learned-policy active deployment unsupported; 40 non-RL failures persist; project repo URL not surfaced.

Claims & capabilities

80.0% expected-decision accuracy; 100% hard-negative suppression; 11/11 static checks; 10/10 dynamic integration cases; 200-case deterministic dataset

Technical surface

API surface
MCP tools — issue_match / issue_feedback / issue_record_resolution
Backend storage
local-first (MCP-native)
Deployment
Local-first / self-hosted MCP server (paper architecture)
Embedding model
not applicable — research paper
Multi-tenancy
not applicable — research paper
MCP
native (first-party MCP design)
A2A
not supported
OpenTelemetry
not applicable — research paper

Similar systems

Other recent method papers — theorized, no distinct product in the catalog, ranked by inbound references.

  • Compressive Transformer T3

    Maintains recent states in full resolution while compressing older memories with learned compression functions. DeepMind.

  • MemGPT v2 / agent-tools T3

    Already in catalog as the foundational MemGPT paper. Note: Letta is the productionised successor (cross-listed).

  • Transformer-XL T3

    Extends context through segment-level recurrence + caching of hidden states from prior segments. Foundational long-context architecture.

  • Generative Agents T3

    Park et al. — landmark agent-simulation paper. Reflection + memory stream + retrieval enable believable agent behavior.

  • MemoryBank T3

    Enhances LLMs with long-term memory. Early influential paper.

  • Reflexion T3

    Language agents with verbal reinforcement learning.

Sources (31 cited facts, 0 third-party)

Each fact links to the page it came from; the badge says who published it (how to read sources).

Related systems

References (1)

  • Model Context Protocol (MCP spec) depends on at runtime — adjacent-infrastructure cell: Model Context Protocol (MCP)-native architecture; logged contextual-bandit policy gates; static (11/11) and dynamic (10/10) integration test harness