Take a stepback and understand why standup was invented in the first place. The reason was: information flow bottleneck - with agents information flow should not be a bottleneck because at any given time the agent can grab as much context as they need, including talking to other agents (althought that nit necessary imo since agents should work visibly through issues and PRs)
For a long time I've avoided anthropomorphizing agents like this, but it really is hard to ignore the effectiveness of using them with human processes and systems. Are the processes (standup, sprint, etc.) effective because they are using our languages? Or are the processes just universally good?
I’m running little offices of 5-10 persistent agents with defined roles and it’s crazy productive and code quality has never been better. I’ve been working on management of physical systems as well, and so far it’s been pretty solid.
Do you basically know that quality of code hasn't declined based on the number of incidents that are occurring? How do you even know what is happening?
Is there any great documentation you have followed to build your workflow or has it been experimentation? I've been experimenting a lot and gotten some cool things done but every time I read up on what everyone else is doing I realize I don't have much imagination and so I miss out.
Been using the Pullboard workflow to build software that MUST be correct, and recently open sourced it. There was another HN link today involving agents role-playing and I can't take that seriously, no offense. (Love fun projects like this, seriously, it's cool.)
From my perspective, agents are great, they code better than most of us. But like all of us, they also make many mistakes or can't see how their changes impact the codebase. But that is a test-driven development mitigation along with some sort of scrutinizing process, "prove it". I'm actively working on this, and by actively working on it, I mean building serious apps that hit correctness walls, figuring out why Pullboard didn't catch it. To me, this is all about the process.
Take a stepback and understand why standup was invented in the first place. The reason was: information flow bottleneck - with agents information flow should not be a bottleneck because at any given time the agent can grab as much context as they need, including talking to other agents (althought that nit necessary imo since agents should work visibly through issues and PRs)
Its unbelievable how much everything changed in less then 5 years.
Just imagine seeing this in 2021
For a long time I've avoided anthropomorphizing agents like this, but it really is hard to ignore the effectiveness of using them with human processes and systems. Are the processes (standup, sprint, etc.) effective because they are using our languages? Or are the processes just universally good?
I would replace the AI avatars with Daedalus, Icarus, Helios and Morpheus avatars from Deus Ex
This is what my life's work is replaced by. I'm way over the initial shock and honestly these little guys are cute.
I know right?
I’m running little offices of 5-10 persistent agents with defined roles and it’s crazy productive and code quality has never been better. I’ve been working on management of physical systems as well, and so far it’s been pretty solid.
Do you basically know that quality of code hasn't declined based on the number of incidents that are occurring? How do you even know what is happening?
Whenever I stop reviewing code I later find yanky shit or a small but important misunderstanding in the plan or...
Claude has let me build really cool things but so far I'm not letting it run on it's own.
About 25-30% of the things shipped by agents need fixes.
Is there any great documentation you have followed to build your workflow or has it been experimentation? I've been experimenting a lot and gotten some cool things done but every time I read up on what everyone else is doing I realize I don't have much imagination and so I miss out.
Honestly Claude code with agent teams and opus 5.5 is good enough for this by default no need for a custom harness / skill
When you say, persistent agents, how does that work in practice for you?
It's cute, but my goal is building serious projects autonomously.
https://github.com/pullboard-dev/pullboard
Been using the Pullboard workflow to build software that MUST be correct, and recently open sourced it. There was another HN link today involving agents role-playing and I can't take that seriously, no offense. (Love fun projects like this, seriously, it's cool.)
From my perspective, agents are great, they code better than most of us. But like all of us, they also make many mistakes or can't see how their changes impact the codebase. But that is a test-driven development mitigation along with some sort of scrutinizing process, "prove it". I'm actively working on this, and by actively working on it, I mean building serious apps that hit correctness walls, figuring out why Pullboard didn't catch it. To me, this is all about the process.
What is the point of an AI agents having a standup?
You don't need the self-policing enforcement of micromanagement that humans use standups for, after all.
I mean, why not just write the harness so that a management agent constantly reads those sub-agent's files and course-correct the subs?
Its a gimmick.
All of this stuff feels like it will be obsoleted by just running one instance faster.