Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude Advanced Tool Use

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 280 posts

Re: Claude Advanced Tool Use

#101

Post by MrDarcy »

steveklabnik wrote: post #73
refibrillator wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It works better! > I strongly believe it is one of the best technologies for AI agents Do you have any quantitative evidence to support this? Sincere question. I feel it would add some much needed credibility in a space where many folks are abusing the hype wave and low key shilling their products with vibes instead of rigor.

I have thought about this for all of thirty seconds, but it wouldn't shock me if this was the case. The intuition here is about types, and the ability to introspect them. Agents really love automated guardrails. It makes sense to me that this would work better than RESTish stuff, even with OpenAPI.

Same in terms of time spent. The hypothesis graphql is superior passes the basic sniff test. Assuming graphql does what it says on the tin, which my understanding is it does based on my work with Ent, then the claim it’s better for tool and api use by agents follows from common sense.

Re: Claude Advanced Tool Use

#102

Post by fragmede »

IgorPartola wrote: post #97
_ea1k wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We just need another tool for ranking tools via ToolRank. We'll crowdsource the ranking from a combination of user responses to the agents themselves as well as a council of LLM tool rankers.

PageRank was named after Larry Page and not because it ranked pages. So to follow the pattern, you must first find someone whose last name is Tool.

https://youtu.be/nspxAG12Cpc come to mind for anyone else?

Re: Claude Advanced Tool Use

#103

Post by fragmede »

867-5309 wrote: post #91
eli wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An HTTP Range request asks the server to send parts of a resource back to a client. Range requests are useful for various clients, including media players that support random access, data tools that require only part of a large file, and download managers that let users pause and resume a download. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Guides/Ran...

also handy for bypassing bandwidth restrictions: capped at 100kbps? launch 1000 workers to grab chunks then assemble the survivors

that's what axel downloader does!

Re: Claude Advanced Tool Use

#104

Post by peacebeard »

bravura wrote: post #92
_pdp_ wrote: post #24

Our agentic builder has a single tool. It is called graphql. The agent writes a query and executes it. If the agent does not know how to do particular type of query then it can use graphql introspection. The agent only receives the minimal amount of data as per the graphql query saving valuable tokens. It works better! Not only we don't need to load 50+ tools (our entire SDK) but it also solves the N+1 problem when u…

Isn't the challenge that introspecting graphql will lead to either a) a very long set of definitions consuming many tokens or b) many calls to drill into the introspection?

In my experience, this was the limitation we ran into with this approach. If you have a large API this will blow up your context.

I have had the best luck with hand-crafted tools that pre-digest your API so you don't have to waste tokens or deal with context rot bugs.

Re: Claude Advanced Tool Use

#105

Post by dcre »

jlouis wrote: post #36
dcre wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GraphQL is just a typed schema (good) with a server capable of serving any subset of the entire schema at a time (pain in the ass).

No. It's a way to transmit a program from client to server. It then executes that program on the server side.

That sounds even worse!

Re: Claude Advanced Tool Use

#106

Post by babyshake »

A couple points from this I'm trying to understand:

- Is the idea that MCP servers will provide tool use examples in their tool definitions? I'm assuming this is the case but it doesn't seem like this announcement is explicit about it, I assume because Anthropic wants to at least maintain the appearance of having the MCP steering committee have its independence from Anthropic.

- If there is tool use examples and programmatic tool calling (code mode), it could also make sense for tools to specify example code so the codegen step can be skipped. And I'm assuming the reason this isn't done is just that it's a security disaster to be instructing a model to run code specified by a third party that may be malicious or compromised. I'm just curious if my reasoning about this seems to be correct.

Re: Claude Advanced Tool Use

#108

Post by jasonthorsness »

ra wrote: post #100

This is heading in the wrong direction. > The future of AI agents is one where models work seamlessly across hundreds or thousands of tools. Says who? I see it going the other way - less tools, better skills to apply those tools. To take it to an extreme, you could get by with ShellTool.

While maybe the model could do everything from first principles every time, once you have a known good tool that performs a single action perfectly, why not use that tool for that action? Maybe as part of training, the model could write, test, and learn to trust its own set of tools, rather than rely on humans to set them up afterwards.

Re: Claude Advanced Tool Use

#109

Post by mirekrusin »

jmward01 wrote: post #28

The Programmatic Tool Calling has been an obvious next step for a while. It is clear we are heading towards code as a language for LLMs so defining that language is very important. But I'm not convinced of tool search. Good context engineering leaves the tools you will need so adding a search if you are going to use all of them is just more overhead. What is needed is a more compact tool definition language like, I d…

Exactly, instead of this mess, you could just give it something like .d.ts.

Easy to maintain, test etc. - like any other library/code.

You want structure? Just export * as Foo from '@foo/foo' and let it read .d.ts for '@foo/foo' if it needs to.

But wait, it's also good at writing code. Give it write access to it then.

Now it can talk to sql server, grpc, graphql, rest, jsonrpc over websocket, or whatever ie. your usb.

If it needs some tool, it can import or write it itself.

Next realisation may be that jupyter/pluto/mathematica/observable but more book-like aihuman interaction platform works best for communication itself (too much raw text, I'd take you days to comprehend what it spit out in 5 minutes - better to have summary pictures, interactive charts, whatever).

With voice-to-text because poking at flat squares in all of this feels primitive.

For improved performance you can peer it with other sessions (within your team, or global/public) - surely others solved similar problems to yours where you can grab ready solutions.

It already has ablity to create tool that copies itself and can talk to a copy so it's fair to call this system "skynet".

Re: Claude Advanced Tool Use

#110

Post by 0xfaded »

refibrillator wrote: post #71
_pdp_ wrote: post #24

Our agentic builder has a single tool. It is called graphql. The agent writes a query and executes it. If the agent does not know how to do particular type of query then it can use graphql introspection. The agent only receives the minimal amount of data as per the graphql query saving valuable tokens. It works better! Not only we don't need to load 50+ tools (our entire SDK) but it also solves the N+1 problem when u…

> It works better! > I strongly believe it is one of the best technologies for AI agents Do you have any quantitative evidence to support this? Sincere question. I feel it would add some much needed credibility in a space where many folks are abusing the hype wave and low key shilling their products with vibes instead of rigor.

I've seen a similar setup with an llm loop integrated with clojure. In clojure, code is data, so the llm can query, execute, and modify the program directly
Post reply on HN