mmasu
Joined 5 years ago
Joined 5 years ago
Maybe one separate semantics validation layer could help, but costs 2x or possibly Nx if you need to recover and turn a wrong query into a correct one
He is building a trading automation for personal use. In his design he gets a message on whatsapp/signal/telegram and approves/rejects the trade suggestion.
To define specifications for this, he defined multiple agents (a quant, a data scientist, a principal engineer, and trading experts - “warren buffett”, “ray dalio”) and let the agents run until they reached a consensus on what the design should be. He said this ran for a couple of hours (so not strictly overnight) after he went to sleep; in the morning he read and amended the output (10s of pages equivalent) and let it build.
This is not a strictly-defined coding task, but there are now many examples of emerging patterns where you have multiple agents supporting each other, running tasks in parallel, correcting/criticising/challenging each other, until some definition of “done” has been satisfied.
That said, personally my usage is much like yours - I run agents one at a time and closely monitor output before proceeding, to avoid finding a clusterfuck of bad choices built on top of each other. So you are not alone my friend :-)
“trust arrives on foot and leaves on horseback”
seems it’s applicable to this case too. Sad to see decades of work being tore apart in a few months.
https://github.com/agoda-com/api-agent
worth taking a look to see multiple approaches to the problem