4 ms·
Let me clarify: we are discussing how the Agent is internally implemented, given LLM calls and tools. It can be built using a graph, where one node makes decisi
by zh2408 2y ago
Let me clarify: we are discussing how the Agent is internally implemented, given LLM calls and tools. It can be built using a graph, where one node makes decisions that branch out to tools and can loop back.
The workflow can vary. For example, it can involve multiple LLM calls chained together without branching or looping. It can also be built using a graph.
I know the terms "graph" and "workflow" can be a bit confusing. It’s like we have a low-level 'cache' at the CPU level and then a high-level 'cache' in software.
- jumploops 2y agoYes, the difference is that in the “pure” agent approach, the model is the only thing directing what to do. In a sense there’s still a graph of execution, but the graph isn’t known until the “agent” runs and decides what tools to use, in what order, and for how long. There is no scaffold, just LLM + MCP (or w/e) in a loop.
- zh2408 2y agoYes!!