Recent submissions

Comment · 1 year ago
You're the best :) thanks for inspiring
Comment · 1 year ago
Fair question. Pydantic.ai looks like a wrapper around the client and closer to an agent framework. agents.json is not that.

agents.json makes an existing API format like OpenAPI, interpretable to LLMs. This is done through tool selection and workflow creation.

For example, someone here mentioned the large Twilio API was hard to manage with an LLM. We could write a Twilio agents.json to bundle API calls into outcome-based workflows, and create a searchable collection that lets us get higher accuracy on tool selection.

Comment · 1 year ago
This SDK isn't meant to be restrictive. This can be implemented into other open-source frameworks as a plugin(ie. BrowserUse, Mastra, LangChain, CrewAI, ...). We just don't want someone like AWS to flip this into a proxy service.

That said, what do you think is the right license for something like this? This is our first time doing OSS.

Comment · 1 year ago
Not ignorant at all! This is our favorite question. MCP is taking a stateful approach, where every client maintains a 1:1 connection with a server. This means that for each user/client connected to your platform, you'd need a dedicated MCP server. We're used to writing software that interfaces with APIs, as stateless and deployment agnostic. agents.json keeps it that way.

For example, you can write an web-based chatbot that uses agents.json to interface with APIs. To do the same with MCP, you'd spin up a separate lambda MCP or process MCP server for each user.

Comment · 1 year ago
We see the same vision you've described, and it'll take thoughtful execution and distribution on our part to continue to make agents.json the standard for tool use.

I've been in touch with the AX team at Netlify since the article was first published. A lot of very relatable philosophies in that article that stuck with me.

Comment · 1 year ago
Funnily enough, a search tool to solve this problem was our product going into YC. Now it’s a part of what we do with wild-card.ai and agents.json. I’d love to extend the tool search functionality for all the tools in your belt

It took us a decently long time to get the search quality good. Just a heads up in case you want to implement this yourself

Comment · 1 year ago
The tail of the problem is quite long. Even if the average model is perfect at these things, do we want them to re-reason each time there's an impasse of outcomes? Often, the outcomes we want to achieve have well traversed flows anyways and we can just encode that.

In fact, I'm looking forward to the day that models are better at this so we can generate agents.json automatically and self-heal with RL.

On the business model, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. We don't charge developers, anyways

Comment · 1 year ago
Interesting! Reach out if you want to chat about it :)
Comment · 1 year ago
That approach does a lot better, but LLMs still have positional bias problem baked into the transformer architecture (https://arxiv.org/html/2406.07791v1). This is where the LLM biases selecting information earlier in the prompt than later, which is unfortunate for tool selection accuracy.

Since 2 steps are required anyways, might as well use a dedicated semantic search for tools like in agents.json.

Comment · 1 year ago
Potentially. I also have reservations about it not technically being open source
Comment · 1 year ago
1) Thanks for being a part of the journey! We also want something that works for us as agent developers. We didn't feel like anything else was addressing this problem and felt like we had to do it ourselves.

We love feedback! This is our first time doing OSS. I agree - MCP and agents.json are not mutually exclusive at all. They solve for difference clients.

2) Agreed. Something we're investing in soon is a generic SDK that can run any valid agents.json. That means the docs might getting a revamp soon too.

3) While many API services may not use OpenAPI, their docs pages often do! For example, readme.com lets you export your REST API docs as OpenAPI. As we add more types of action sources, agents.json won't be 1:1 with OpenAPI. In that way, we left the future of agents.json extensible.

4) Great idea! I think this would be so useful

Comment · 1 year ago
No worries! In other cases, I believe you would be right. But splitting up context is not optional with MCP. Part of the whole state will always reside in an external entity.
Comment · 1 year ago
We're grateful that bigger players like Resend, Alpaca, etc do want to implement the protocol. The problem is honestly onboarding them fast enough. That's one of the main areas we're going to build out in the next few weeks. Until then, we're writing every agents.json.

If you check out wild-card.ai and create your own collection, you'll find that it's actually really easy to develop with. As a developer, you never have to look at an agents.json if you don't want to.

Comment · 1 year ago
Bearish on everyone needing to be on stateful protocols. Developers should have the option to have their state managed internal to their application.
Comment · 1 year ago
llms.txt is a great standard for making website content more readable to LLMs, but it doesn’t address the challenges of taking structured actions. While llms.txt helps LLMs retrieve and interpret information, agents.json enables them to execute multi-step workflows reliably.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton