7 ms·
Lat.md: Agent Lattice: a knowledge graph for your codebase, written in Markdown
- Yokohiii 7mo ago> "chalk": "^5.6.2", security.md ist missing apparently.
- touristtam 7mo agogood catch. Makes me wonder if we could feed the Agent with a repository of known vulnerability and security best practices to check against and get ride of most deps. Just ask _outloud_ so to speak.
- wiseowise 7mo agoWhy would you even need chalk on modern Node.js? It can style natively now.
- 1st1 7mo agoGood idea. :) https://github.com/1st1/lat.md/commit/da819ddc9bf8f1a44f67f05d2b175b04314d58e4 https://github.com/1st1/lat.md/commit/da819ddc9bf8f1a44f67f0...
- 1st1 7mo agoFixed
- nimonian 7mo agoI have a vitepress package in most of my repos. It is a knowledge graph that also just happens to produce heat looking docs for humans when served over http. Agents are very happy to read the raw .md.
- ssyhape 7mo ago[flagged]
- cyanydeez 7mo agoWe all know this isn't for humans. It's for LLMs. So better question is why there isn't a bootstrap to get your LLM to scaffold it out and assist in detailing it.
- stingraycharles 7mo agoYou’re replying to an LLM, too, fwiw.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- drooby 7mo agoGraphRAG is for LLMS... markdown is for humans.. humans that exist in the meantime
- 1st1 7mo agoAdding a command to bootstrap lat for an existing code base is a good idea, I'll work on it. Other than that the goal of lat is to make the agent use it and update it and it has tools to enforce that.
- ossianericson 7mo agoI would say that when you treat your Markdown as the authoritative source, I of course don't get it automated but that is my choice. It takes knowledge of the domain, but when you have deep specific knowledge that is worth so much more than automated updates. I use AI to get the initial MD but then I edit that. Sure it doesn't get auto updated, but I would never trust advice on the fly that got updated based on AI output on the internet.
- maxbeech 7mo ago[dead]
- iddan 7mo agoSo we are reinventing the docs /*/*.md directory? /s I think this is a good idea just don’t really get why would you need a tool around it
- tonyarkles 7mo agoOne of the things that I've been chewing on lately is the sync problem. Having a CI job that identifies places where the docs have drifted from the implementation seems pretty valuable.
- wiseowise 7mo agoPython community figured this out in 2001: https://docs.python.org/3/library/doctest.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/doctest.html
- 1st1 7mo agoI don't think this is related in any way.
- wiseowise 6mo ago> Having a CI job that identifies places where the docs have drifted from the implementation seems pretty valuable. https://docs.python.org/3/library/doctest.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/doctest.html > To check that a module’s docstrings are up-to-date by verifying that all interactive examples still work as documented. To perform regression testing by verifying that interactive examples from a test file or a test object work as expected. To write tutorial documentation for a package, liberally illustrated with input-output examples. Depending on whether the examples or the expository text are emphasized, this has the flavor of “literate testing” or “executable documentation”. Seems pretty related to me.
- 1st1 6mo agoNot really. > Having a CI job that identifies places where the docs have drifted from the implementation seems pretty valuable. Testing with lat isn't about ensuring consistency of code with public API documentation. It is about: * ensuring you can quickly analyze what tests were added / changed by looking at the English description * ensuring you spot when an agent randomly drops or alters an important functional/regression tests The problem with coding agents is that they produce enormous diffs, and while reading tests code is very important in practice your focus and attention drifts and you can't do thorough analysis. This isn't a new problem though, the same thing applies to classic code reviews -- rarely coding is a bottle neck, it's getting all reviews from humans to vet the change. Lat shifts the focus from reading test code to understanding the semantics of the test. And because instead of reviewing 2000 lines of code you can focus on reviewing only 100 lines change in lat.md you'll be able to control your tests and implementation more tightly. For projects where code quality isn't paramount I now just glance over the code to spot anti-pattern and models failing to DRY and resorting to duplicating large swaths of code.
- jatins 7mo agotl;dr: One file, bad (gets too big for context) So give you agent a whole obsidian I am skeptical how that helps. Agents cant just grep in one big file if reading entire file is the problem.
- 1st1 7mo agoThe problem is that for any non-trivial question agents have to grep A LOT to understand the high-level logic expressed in code. In big projects grepping can take minutes some times. Lat short-circuits grepping significantly with `lat search` that agents happily use.
- reactordev 7mo agoI found having smaller structured markdowns in each folder explaining the space and classes within keeps Claude and Codex grounded even in a 10M+ LOC codebase of c/c++
- 1st1 7mo agoI'm working on making lat hierarchical, e.g. - lat.md # high-level description of the project - frontend/lat.md # frontend-related knowledge - backend/lat.md # details about your backend
- reactordev 6mo agoIt’s a start but it wouldn’t solve my uses cases. I developed my own skill for this. Called morning-routine that does a recursive `ls -R` on all the Claude markdowns. It’s staged in multiple stages so I don’t have to waste as much context if I don’t need to. Keep going, prompt engineering is fascinating.
- aand16 6mo agoReading this phrase gave me brain damage
- mmastrac 7mo agoI definitely agree with the need for this. There's just too much to put into the agents file to keep from killing your context window right off the bat. Knowledge compression is going to be key. I saw this a couple of days ago and I've been working on figuring out what the right workflows will be with it. It's a useful idea: the agents.md torrent of info gets replaced with a thinner shim that tells the agent how to get more data about the system, as well as how to update that. I suspect there's ways to shrink that context even more.
- 1st1 7mo ago++ > I suspect there's ways to shrink that context even more. Yeah, I'm experimenting with some ideas on that, like adding `lat agent` command to act as a subagent to search through lat and summarize related knowledge without polluting the parent's agent context.
- touristtam 7mo agoAt that point why not have an obsidian vault in your repo and get the Agent to write to it?
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- dangoor 7mo agoI was thinking the same. Especially now that Obsidian has a CLI to work with the vault. The one thing I saw in the README is that lat has a format for source files to link back to the lat.md markdown, but I don't see why you couldn't just define an "// obs:wikilink" sort of format in your AGENTS.md
- 1st1 7mo agoBecause lat gives agents more tools and enforces the workflow. Unlike obsidian, lat allows markdown files link into functions/structs/classes/etc too. This saves agents time on grepping but also allows you to build better workflows with tests. Test cases can be described as sections in `lat.md/` and marked with `require-code-mention: true`. Each spec then must be referenced by a `// @lat:` comment in test code. `lat check` flags any spec without a backlink, so you can review and maintain test coverage from the knowledge graph.
- afzalive 6mo agoThis is interesting. I've been using a system-wide Obsidian vault that all my agents use for stuff that's platform-specific instead of project specific (think common Android/Samsung-related or ANR fixes). So far, it hasn't been mind-blowing but it's only been a month so its knowledge from there is also limited. lat seems like it could be useful to cross-reference company-wide projects.
- 1st1 6mo agopotentially. I'm toying with the idea of distributed lat ;)
- robertclaus 7mo agoWe've been doing this with simple mkdocs for ages. My experience is that rendering the markdown to feel like public docs is important for getting humans to review and take it seriously. Otherwise it goes stale as soon as one dev on the project doesn't care.
- eliottre 7mo agoThe staleness problem mentioned here is real. For agentic systems, a markdown-based DAG of your codebase is more practical than a traditional graph because agents work within context windows. You can selectively load relevant parts without needing a complex query engine. The key is making updates low-friction -- maybe a pre-commit hook or CI job that refreshes stale nodes.
- 1st1 7mo agoThis is what lat is doing. `lat init` would install hooks to double check that Claude/Codex/OpenCode update lat.md when they finish the work.
- bisonbear 7mo agomanaging agents.md is important, especially at scale. however I wonder how much of a measurable difference something like this makes? in theory, it's cool, but can you show me that it's actually performing better as compared to a large agents.md, nested agents.md, skills? more general point being that we need to be methodical about the way we manage agent context. if lat.md shows a 10% broad improvement in agent perf in my repo, then I would certainly push for adoption. until then, vibes aren't enough
- 1st1 7mo agoI'm working on a blog post and on benchmarks. Here [1] Armin suggested I take something like quickjs, built lat base for it, and compare side by side how, say, claude code works with lat vs. without. I'm very early into this and need to build proper harness, but I can see sometimes lat allowing for up to 2x faster coding sessions. But the main benefit to me isn't speed, it's the fact that I can now review diffs faster and stay more engaged with the agent. [1] https://x.com/mitsuhiko/status/2037649308086902989?s=20 https://x.com/mitsuhiko/status/2037649308086902989?s=20
- bisonbear 6mo agoVery cool, interested to read more once you post! FWIW I've been building eval infras that does something adjacent/related — replaying real repo work against different agent configs, and measuring the agent's quality dimensions (pass/fail, but also human intent alignment, code review, etc.). If you want to compare notes on the harness design, or if having an independent eval of lat vs. no-lat on quickjs would be useful, happy to chat :)
- adrq 7mo agoSo the graph is human-maintained, and agents consume it and `lat check` is supposed to catch broken links and code-spec drift. How do you manage this in a multi-agent setup? Is it still a manual merge+fix conflicts situation? That's where I keep seeing the biggest issues with multi-agent setups
- 1st1 7mo agoThe graph can be human-maintained, but the preferred flow is to let agents update it.
- adrq 6mo agoCurious if you've seen a difference between agents finding things through the graph structure vs just vector search over a docs directory. The section constraints and check validation seem like the real quality wins here, wondering how much the wiki link topology adds on top of that.
- 1st1 6mo agoDocs typically focus on the public api, lat focuses on both public and private impl detail
- caijia 7mo agoI've been doing similar work since Claude code updated their "slash command"(later merge to skills), first 3-4 long content docs, gradually split to modular groups. I designed it for loading the docs based on what agent is actually doing. The maintenance part is honestly not that hard, for me, I created some CI jobs that diffs the docs against the codebase and flags drift handles of it. The pattern works. But I keep catching myself spending more time on how to organize context than on what the agent is actually supposed to accomplish. Feels like the whole space has that problem right now.
- 1st1 7mo agoCreator of lat.md here. There are two videos with me talking about lat in more detail [1] and less detail [2]. But I'm also working on a blog post exploring lat and its potential, stay tuned. AMA :) [1] https://x.com/mitsuhiko/status/2037649308086902989?s=20 https://x.com/mitsuhiko/status/2037649308086902989?s=20 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIOtYnI-8_c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIOtYnI-8_c
- h14h 6mo agoWhat does lat.md do better than a docs/ or specs/ directory you manage yourself?
- 1st1 6mo ago- makes agent manage it for you in a controlled way - gives agent tools to search and traverse the graph, better than they can with grep - ability to have semantic links into your code and back etc, see the README
- h14h 6mo agoI read the README and it wasn't clear what the material benefits of these features were over e.g. having the agent write an organize markdown files with guidance, incorporating README.md with indexes/ToCs that act as lookup tables, linking to code with relative filepath links and incorporating descriptions or additional context where needed. Not trying to poopoo your project or be dismissive, just curious whether I'm missing something.
- orthogonalinfo 7mo ago[flagged]
- inerte 7mo agoSo... does it work? Good description of what it does, but, does it actually make agents better, or use less tokens? What's the benchmark?
- 1st1 7mo agoI'm working on a blog post about lat, stay tuned. Yes, it does work and I continue improving it.
- inerte 7mo agoCool. I've been thinking about tools to help coding agents lately, and I've always wondered if I could do a better job than actual Claude Code / Codex. They can do the `rg`s and kick off multiple agents and the skills, etc, and I couldn't find a way to actually prove there's a ROI of using something like Agent Lattice. Curious to see the results!
- 1st1 7mo agoOne anecdote: I added lat to quickjs codebase and asked questions like "how does quickjs gc circular object graphs" and was able to get an answer in 12 seconds vs 2 minutes without lat. But take this with a grain of salt, I need better benchmark harness. Benchmarks are hard to do in general, for LLMs it's its own hell. :)
- cowlby 7mo agoThis is one of the things that GitHub Spec Kit solves for me. The specify.plan step launches code exploration agents and builds itself the latest data model, migrations, etc etc. Really reduces the need to document stuff when the agent self discovers codebase needs. Give Claude sqlite/supabase MCP, GitHub CLI, Linear CLI, Chrome or launch.json and it can really autonomously solve this.
- midnight_eclair 7mo agoi've had a related question recently but it didn't get much traction https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47543324 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47543324 what's the point of markdown? there's nothing useful you can do with it other than handing it over to llm and getting some probabilistic response
- 1st1 7mo agoRead this section, I've just updated it to be more clear, hopefully will answer your question: https://github.com/1st1/lat.md?tab=readme-ov-file#the-idea https://github.com/1st1/lat.md?tab=readme-ov-file#the-idea
- midnight_eclair 6mo ago> Test specs with enforcement — test cases can be described as sections in lat.md/ and marked with require-code-mention: true. Each spec then must be referenced by a // @lat: comment in test code. lat check flags any spec without a backlink, so you can review and maintain test coverage from the knowledge graph. if you mean this paragraph - imo that's still too hand-wavy compared to enforcement through generative tests for spec conformance.
- 1st1 6mo agocan you tell me more about what you mean by generative tests for spec conformance?
- midnight_eclair 6mo agotests generated based on normative spec to validate if the implementation accepts the right inputs, rejects the wrong ones, produces correctly shaped outputs and to some extend also validates behavior. normative specs allow generation of such tests deterministically - no need to spend tokens, no risk of hallucinations, much higher level of confidence that generated code is correct and much more accurate feedback from the test system into the LLM loop.
- hermestrigemis 7mo ago[dead]
- helixfelix 7mo agoCan you offer any insights how this compares to building an AST or RAG over your codebase? Several projects do that and it autoupdates on changes too. The agent does a wide sweep using AST/RAG search followed by drill down using an LSP. This sped up my search phase by 50%. How Will this project help me?
- 1st1 7mo agoI think it's a great idea and I'm considering building this in lat too. Code embedding models can definitely speed up grepping further, but they still wouldn't help much when you have a business logic detail encoded across multiple complex files. With lat you'd have it documented in a paragraph of text + a few [[..]] links into your code.
- jarpineh 6mo agoIntriguing concept, especially because I've thought of dabbling into this area. Can this tool solve these problems with models: - insisting on using sed and shell redirection instead of File Edit Tools? - trying to use npx to run commands instead of npm run that's right there in package.json - forgetting to produce the docs that was asked for in AGENTS.md - checking and using latest package versions instead of deciding somehow that years old versions are good enough To my mind these are context problems, where somehow model chooses other information it has over what's in the repository, and what tools it has on call. The other side of Lat.md, checking diffs models make among other changes, that's hard for me to grasp. I'd need to see it in action. Perhaps a coding session as a stream?
- jchidley 6mo agoI was already doing what lat.md does — just badly "why not just put markdown files in each folder?" I had those files. I also had the answer. I had lots of `.md` files, custom skills for consistency checks, a test-audit skill for coverage gaps, a code-truth skill that worked backwards from code to documentation. All untethered from the actual code. Nothing connected a design decision in `auth-flow.md` to the function implementing it. Nothing told me when a renamed method made the docs fiction. So I became the binding. Personally running consistency checks. Running reconciliation. Constantly worrying about drift. It didn't scale — it scaled me. lat.md replaced that work with three things: docs link into source code and source code comments link back to docs — the connection is explicit, not hopeful. `lat check` enforces referential integrity automatically — the tool worries about consistency so I don't have to. And the knowledge compounds — every session the agent consults the graph and can update it. I've taken to ending conversations with "review this and update [x]" where "x" is some document that I'm working on in the thread. lat.md gets updated for free. I haven't run rigorous tests. It isn't perfect. There's no planning engine but I get by fine with various *plan.md file. But I'm rolling it out across all my repos because it replaced manual work I was already doing, more reliably than I was doing it. Not "why do I need a tool for documentation?" but "why was I personally doing the job of a linter?"