You mean except for all the obvious reasons?

My 2c is that agents are not at the level where companies can easily just have unconstrained LLM with tools and let it be. Different parts of the workflow can have different models, different tools, different constraints, guardrails, etc.

The entrypoint still has to come from somewhere, and it's much more convenient to be able to explain the security and legal teams how data is handled, what is logged, how you can have control over a scenario where the agent does something unexpected.

Sure, for a personal project that could be enough, but we all know those companies target enterprise customers, and you would be surprised how little adoption there is when it comes to workflow automation due to the lack of controls.

>runtime that runs the LLM with tools

This "runtime" is what you are building with LangChain.. A harness like claude code/codex etc is general purpose and its env is a shell + tools. But with a custom runtime (basically a loop where we ask llm what to do next), we can give it specific tools which we define in code. This can help with things like authorization since, well its custom code you own.. so the runtime gets the tools scoped to the users permissions etc.

What's the point in putting the vibe back in if you're implementing a specific software development process to avoid the vibe?

[flagged]