This paper surveys automated commit message generation with LLMs, suggesting a new evaluation protocol for future work.
Commit messages are vital for traceability, maintenance, and onboarding in modern software projects, yet their quality is frequently inconsistent. Recent large language models (LLMs) can transform code diffs into natural language summaries, offering a path to more consistent and informative commit messages. This paper makes two contributions: (i) it provides a systematic survey of automated commit message generation with LLMs, critically comparing prompt-only, fine-tuned, and retrieval-augmented approaches; and (ii) it specifies a transparent, agent-based evaluation blueprint centered on CommitBench. Unlike prior reviews, we include a detailed dataset audit, preprocessing impacts, evaluation metrics, and error taxonomy. The protocol defines dataset usage and splits, prompting and context settings, scoring and selection rules, and reporting guidelines (results by project, language, and commit type), along with an error taxonomy to guide qualitative analysis. Importantly, this work emphasizes methodology and design rather than presenting new empirical benchmarking results. The blueprint is intended to support reproducibility and comparability in future studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Trigui et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: