3 ms·
Yes, I wonder if it ever makes sense to partition an agent's toolkit across multiple "agents"—besides horizontal scaling. Why should one process have access to
by gavmor 1y ago
Yes, I wonder if it ever makes sense to partition an agent's toolkit across multiple "agents"—besides horizontal scaling. Why should one process have access to APIs that another doesn't? Authorization and secrets, maybe, but functionality?
- DarmokJalad1701 1y agoDepending on the capability or context size of the model, it is easy to imagine a situation where specifying too many tools (or MCPs) can overwhelm it, affecting the accuracy.
- ramesh31 1y ago> it is easy to imagine a situation where specifying too many tools (or MCPs) can overwhelm it, affecting the accuracy. Answer to this is agent explorable interfaces a la HATEOAS. Define a single entry point to your MCP gateway and give the agent clues to drill down and find what it needs to use.
- gavmor 1y agoYou may get some mileage out of protocols like Agent Network Protocol (ANP), Agent Interaction & Transaction Protocol (AITP), Agora "Protocol Documents" (PDs), agents.json, Airweave, or the Coral Protocol. AITPs "message passthrough pattern" supposedly enables "progressive" delegation—where a general agent can forward requests to specialized agents. agents.json may facilitate a sort of progressive disclosure across the "flows" and "links" of multi-step workflows that an agent is guided through, wherein subsequent actions or information is revealed as dependencies are met, limiting upfront information overload. I've only skimmed the barest details of these protocols, guided by this paper: https://arxiv.org/html/2504.16736v2 https://arxiv.org/html/2504.16736v2