Live data from Hacker News

Building an Advanced Agentic Harness

data4sci.com

41–47 of 47 posts

Re: Building an Advanced Agentic Harness

#41
post #39

So if I understand correctly, one of the agents is creating the workflow as a DAG dynamically for each new job it's given? That's the most interesting part to me. The rest I was already pretty familiar with. So maybe that's a big chunk of what you need for an 'AI Company': an agent that manages the goals and hierarchies. Although of course the DAG and agent hierarchy is not quite the same thing. But maybe the workflo…

Yes, there's a team of agents, each with a different role.

Re: Building an Advanced Agentic Harness

#42
post #7

Anyone else have related reading that touches on this? I'm building my own custom harness and want to start implementing loop support, etc. But I also want to build some sort of framework so that it's dynamic (e.g. this needs to run x number of iterations, while planning needs to run y number of iterations).

OpenAI and Anthropic both have blog posts about programmatic tool use. Tbh I settled in STARLARK as the intermediary language it's a python dialect so most llms can use it with little help.https://github.com/zarldev/zarlmono/blob/main/zkit%2Fagent%2... it's a wrapper around the calls of the other tool set.

Re: Building an Advanced Agentic Harness

#43
post #2

why do i hate skillks, harnesses , memory systems whatever. such ideas that everyone thinks they've discovered but are totally useless in practice.

so if you don't use skill, harness and memory systems, what do you use?

just out of box models.

Re: Building an Advanced Agentic Harness

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

agreed. All of these are trying to get to something that can't really every be achieved with LLMs with is determinism. Folks are trying to constrain the models to behave in a certain way with all of these tools, but there's far too many edge cases for them to be reliable. Doesn't mean they can't add some value, but it seems very limited. Hoping it's only a matter of time before we go back to engineering and step back…

We won't. AI engineering is here to stay whether people like it or not. See what some guys like Linus Torvalds, or Eric S. Raymond are saying about. It's not so much about "vibes" but using the tool (yes the AI tool) in a certain way that can propel yourself towards your goal at unprecedented speeds.

> It's not so much about "vibes" but using the tool (yes the AI tool) in a certain way that can propel yourself towards your goal at unprecedented speeds.

I think most would agree with that, unfortunately, this is not how LLMs or agentic flows are being marketed, nor how firms are encouraging their users to use them. It's being sold in a manner completely different from its capabilities.

I've maintained this for a long time but if AI was being sold as a way to achieve superhuman levels of productivity and to help you with certain goals or tasks then people would be far less opposed to its adoption. The social havoc it's wreaked as a result of Altman et al.'s bluster about it being a fully ready, human-level replacement for humans has done its reputational damage and it will take years for that to recover, especially given that they don't seem to care (yet).

Re: Building an Advanced Agentic Harness

#46
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stringing what together? A sequence of logical implications? The word for that is "proof".

You mis understand, which is why these articles are so empty. I could find some math starved journal and poblish a bunch of logical implications, but that doesn't mean the logic is sound. A collection of logical implications proof.

A sequence of logical implications that each follow from previous ones is exactly what a proof is. Did I really need to spell that out?

Re: Building an Advanced Agentic Harness

#47
post #2

why do i hate skillks, harnesses , memory systems whatever. such ideas that everyone thinks they've discovered but are totally useless in practice.

I'll take the "best way to elicit a clarification response on the internet is to state the opposite confidently" bait... The example listed in the article -- fanning out a few simple get-population, get-timezone, and make-summary calls -- is, in fact, useless overengineering. This is a basic promise chain with extra steps (priced with tokens). But as with all software pattern learning, we learn the concepts with simp…

what is lacking is a benchmark. I think the OP is trying to elicit that.
Post reply on HN