Top
Best
New

Posted by pomarie 6/26/2025

Learnings from building AI agents(www.cubic.dev)
172 points | 63 commentspage 2
jstummbillig 6/26/2025|
The multi agent thing with different roles is so obviously not a great concept, that I am very hesitant to build towards it, even thought it seems to win out right now. We want a AI that internally does what it needs to do to solve a problem, given a good enough problem description, tools and context. I really do not want to have to worry about breaking up tasks into chunks that are smaller than what I could handle myself, and I really hope that that in the near future this will go away.
brabel 6/26/2025||
People creating products need to do what gives results right now. And I can attest that breaking up jobs into small steps seems to work better for most scenarios. When that becomes unnecessary, creating products that are useful will become much easier for sure, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.
bckr 6/26/2025||
I’m not being sarcastic when I say that I think supervisor agents and agent swarms in general are the way forward here
shenberg 6/26/2025||
When I read "51% fewer false positives" followed immediately by "Median comments per pull request cut by half" it makes me wonder how many true positives they find. That's maybe unfair as my reference is automated tooling in the security world, where the true-positive/false-positive ratio is so bad that a 50% reduction in false positives is a drop in the bucket
iandanforth 6/26/2025||
I learned from a recent post (https://sean.heelan.io/2025/05/22/how-i-used-o3-to-find-cve-...) that finding security issues can take 100+ calls to an LLM to get good signal. So I wonder about agent implementers who are trying to get good signal out of single calls, even if they are specialized ones.
bckr 6/26/2025|
I think that article is talking about finding a previously unknown exploit. A known and well documented vulnerability should be much easier to identify
EnPissant 6/26/2025||
> Explicit reasoning improves clarity. Require your AI to clearly explain its rationale first—this boosts accuracy and simplifies debugging.

I wonder what models they are using because reasoning models do this by default, even if they don't give you that output.

This post reads more like a marketing blog post than any real world advice.

N_Lens 6/26/2025||
Very vague post light on details, and as usual, feels more like a marketing pitch for the website.
weego 6/26/2025||
It's recreating the monolith vs micro-service argument by proxy for a new generation to plan conference talks around.
flippyhead 6/26/2025||
I found it useful.
curiousgal 6/26/2025||
> Encouraged structured thinking by forcing the AI to justify its findings first, significantly reducing arbitrary conclusions.

Ah yes, because we know very well that the current generation of AI models reasons and draws conclusions based on logic and understanding... This is the true face palm.

elzbardico 6/26/2025||
The "confidence" field in the structured output was what really baffled me.
nico 6/26/2025||
Humans work pretty much the same way

Several studies have shown that we first make the decision and then we reason about it to justify it

In that sense, we are not much more rational than an LLM

disgruntledphd2 6/26/2025|||
Humans have a lot more introspection capabilities than any current LLM.
alganet 6/26/2025|||
> Several studies

Please, cite those studies. I want to read them.

OnionBlender 6/26/2025||
What's funny about the bullet points in section 3 is that it only compares to the previous noisy agent, rather than having no agent. 51% fewer false positives, median comments per pull request cut by half, spending less time managing irrelevant comments? Turn it off and you could get a 100% reduction in false positives and spend zero time on irrevant AI generated comments.
hbogert 6/27/2025||
ah the joy of non-determinism. Have fun tweaking till you die. Also I wish youa lot of fun giving your customers buttons to disable/enable options.
bumbledraven 6/26/2025||
What model were they using?
mosura 6/26/2025|
Lessons.
chanux 6/26/2025||
https://nolearnings.com/
criddell 6/26/2025|||
I don't like the word learnings either, but you write for your audience and this article was probably written with the hope that it would be shared on LinkedIn.

Learnings might be the right choice here.

I wouldn't complain if the HN headline mutator were to replace "Learnings" with "lessons".

flippyhead 6/26/2025|||
This is LITERALLY mind blowing.
tempodox 6/26/2025||
[flagged]
More comments...