| ▲ | 2001zhaozhao an hour ago | |
> be intentional about a process, move the planning artifact to a file, use multiple research/propose/review sessions to dial it in Yeah, I think we need something like that as well. I am actually working on an virtual artifact filesystem in my orchestrator to enable this. So agents can create a persistent, versioned plan artifact separate from the codebase (maybe a HTML) and iterate it alongside the user, much like what ChatGPT/claude.ai can already do but for a coding agent. Then you'd need to define a process and get the agent to follow it, but that's much easier and mostly a mix of prompt and orchestration primitives. > exploratory implementation elements This is a good point, I've ran into a lot of instances as well where my agents in plan mode would like to explore something but can't because of permissions. I wonder if there should be some kind of system like a "experiment subagent" to handle it. | ||
| ▲ | verdverm an hour ago | parent [-] | |
> separate from the codebase Commit it to git, it's not far off from an llm-wiki I have no orchestration primitives, just a skill tied to a .design/*.md Unless we consider opencode sometimes using a subagent as a primitive? Maybe the problem is leaving the clankers to their own devices for too long/much I intentionally block almost every tool for the design/review agents, letting them "do" things is a distraction. I will use the build agent and tell it what to do if I need that experiment. I don't want to have to read through the wasted tokens a bunch of dumb bots burned through to create walls of markdown. They go on way too many side quests | ||