←back to thread

Building Effective AI Agents

(www.anthropic.com)
543 points Anon84 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.455s | source
Show context
simonw ◴[] No.44302601[source]
This article remains one of the better pieces on this topic, especially since it clearly defines which definition of "AI agents" they are using at the start! They use: "systems where LLMs dynamically direct their own processes and tool usage, maintaining control over how they accomplish tasks".

I also like the way they distinguish between "agents" and "workflows", and describe a bunch of useful workflow patterns.

I published some notes on that article when it first came out: https://simonwillison.net/2024/Dec/20/building-effective-age...

A more recent article from Anthropic is https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/built-multi-agent-rese... - "How we built our multi-agent research system". I found this one fascinating, I wrote up a bunch of notes on it here: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jun/14/multi-agent-research-s...

replies(5): >>44302676 #>>44303599 #>>44304356 #>>44305116 #>>44305898 #
kodablah ◴[] No.44305898[source]
I believe the definition of workflows in this article is inaccurate. Workflows in modern engines do not take predefined code paths, and agents are effectively the same as workflows in these cases. The redefinition of workflows seems to be an attempt to differentiate, but for the most part an agent is nothing more than a workflow that is a loop that dynamically invokes things based on LLM responses. Modern workflow engines are very dynamic.
replies(2): >>44306120 #>>44306707 #
1. simonw ◴[] No.44306707[source]
You appear to be making the mistake of assuming that the only valid definition for the term "workflow" is the definition used by software such as https://airflow.apache.org/

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/workflow thinks the word dates back to 1921.

There no reason Anthropic can't take that word and present their own alternative definition for it in the context of LLM tool usage, which is what they've done here.

replies(1): >>44311420 #
2. kodablah ◴[] No.44311420[source]
Right, I am saying I don't think their definition is an accurate one with the modern use of the term. It's an artificially limited definition to fit a narrative. An agent is nothing more than a very limited workflow.