3 ms·

Same here, and I also really enjoy the high level design/structure part of it. THAT part doesn't mesh too well with AI, since it's still really bad at autonomo

by nomel 9mo ago

Same here, and I also really enjoy the high level design/structure part of it. THAT part doesn't mesh too well with AI, since it's still really bad at autonomous wholistic level planning. I'm still learning how to prompt in a way that results in a structure that is close to what I want/reasonable. I suspect going a more visual block diagram route, to generate some intermediate .md or whatever, might have promise, especially for defining clear bounds/separation of concerns. Related, AI seems to be the wrong tool for refactoring code (I recently spent $50 trying to move four files). So, if whatever structure isn't reasonable, I'm left with manually moving things around, which is definitely un-fun.

qingcharles 9mo ago
Definitely go for that middle step. If it's something bigger I get them to draw out a multi-phase plan, then I go through and refine that .md and have them work from that.
burnerToBetOut 9mo ago
> …I suspect going a more visual block > diagram route, to generate some > intermediate .md or whatever, might have > promise, especially for defining clear > bounds/separation of concerns… Can confirm [1] So can my automaton bud [2]… _____ MODEL … The Verdict: If you provide a clear instruction like "Before you touch the code, read architecture.puml and ensure your changes do not violate the defined inheritance/dependency structure," the agent will be very effective at following it. If you just "hope" it bears it in mind, it probably won't. _The agent is a tool, not a mind-reader; it will take the shortest path to a passing test unless you wall that path off with your architectural models_. … To make it actually work, you need to turn the UML from a "suggestion" into a "blocker." You should add a section to your AGENTS.md (or CLAUDE.md ) that looks like this: 1. Tool Trigger: By using words like "…" … Why this works: … _____ [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46935979 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46935979 [2] https://g2ww.short.gy/TheMightyBooch https://g2ww.short.gy/TheMightyBooch

by nomel 9mo ago

qingcharles 9mo ago

Definitely go for that middle step. If it's something bigger I get them to draw out a multi-phase plan, then I go through and refine that .md and have them work from that.

burnerToBetOut 9mo ago

> …I suspect going a more visual block > diagram route, to generate some > intermediate .md or whatever, might have > promise, especially for defining clear > bounds/separation of concerns… Can confirm [1] So can my automaton bud [2]… _____ MODEL … The Verdict: If you provide a clear instruction like "Before you touch the code, read architecture.puml and ensure your changes do not violate the defined inheritance/dependency structure," the agent will be very effective at following it. If you just "hope" it bears it in mind, it probably won't. _The agent is a tool, not a mind-reader; it will take the shortest path to a passing test unless you wall that path off with your architectural models_. … To make it actually work, you need to turn the UML from a "suggestion" into a "blocker." You should add a section to your AGENTS.md (or CLAUDE.md ) that looks like this: 1. Tool Trigger: By using words like "…" … Why this works: … _____ [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46935979 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46935979 [2] https://g2ww.short.gy/TheMightyBooch https://g2ww.short.gy/TheMightyBooch