undefined | Better HN

0 pointscolin_jack2mo ago0 comments

"Agent 1, refactor that method to be more efficient. Agent 5, tighten up the graphics on level 3!"

I'm not sure its even that, his description of his role in this is:

"You are a Product Manager, and Gas Town is an Idea Compiler. You just make up features, design them, file the implementation plans, and then sling the work around to your polecats and crew. Opus 4.5 can handle any reasonably sized task, so your job is to make tasks for it. That’s it."

And he says he isn't reviewing the code, he lets agents review each others code from look of it. I am interested to see the specs/feature definitions he's giving them, that seems to be one interesting part of his flow.

0 comments

mjr002mo ago

Yeah maybe the refactoring was a bad example because it implies looking at the code. It's more like "Agent 1, change the color of this widget. Agent 9, add a red dot whenever there's a new message. Agent 67, send out a marketing email blast advertising our new feature."

sonnig2mo ago

Assuming both agents are using the same model, what could the reviewer agent add of value to the agent writing the code? It feels like "thinking mode" but with extra steps, and more chance of getting them stuck in a loop trying to overcorrect some small inane detail.

colin_jackOP2mo ago

He does cover this later:

"I implemented a formula for Jeffrey Emanuel’s “Rule of Five”, which is the observation that if you make an LLM review something five times, with different focus areas each time though, it generates superior outcomes and artifacts. So you can take any workflow, cook it with the Rule of Five, and it will make each step get reviewed 4 times (the implementation counts as the first review)."

And I guess more generally, there is a level of non-determinism in there anyway.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse