3 ms·

I literally hold a "retro" with my agent after a session. > Let's conclude with a retro. Did you run into any issues during this session that you think could b

I literally hold a "retro" with my agent after a session. > Let's conclude with a retro. Did you run into any issues during this session that you think could be improved? Any failed tool calls, confusing docs/prompts, or tricky wording that took you effort to figure out, etc? Any final thoughts that you want to raise? Anything minor you didn't mention? Help make this codebase easier for the next agent to work in. It has ideas for coding changes, spots unmentioned small bugs, suggests invariants (I have a high-level list of invariants to keep), principles to adopt, lint rules, tooling tweaks (I've built SO MUCH agent-tooling; so many useful bash scripts), skill-file updates, follow up work, all kinds of stuff. Listen to your agent's whinging.

dr_dshiv 2mo ago
Yes, I build into my gnite skill for closing conversations
karl_gluck 2mo ago
Agreed. After an implementation session, I often use: "did you notice any inconsistencies or opportunities to clarify/consolidate parameters or functionality while you were working?" Another strategy that has worked well for my MCP server is noticing a sequence of failed tool-calls, then returning a response that contains a request for the agent to provide feedback via a skill.
jagenabler2 2mo ago
I’m just holding out for when this stuff becomes mainstream and automatically built into tooling. I don’t want to hold a retro with my agent. I actually want to spend as little time as possible talking with it.
- AlexErrant 2mo ago
  Sure, you can "vibe/auto-retro". But in my experience the retro often results in "higher-order" structural changes. In starker terms: if you're ok with "vibe principles", "vibe invariants", "vibe lint-rules", "vibe skill updates", and "vibe agent-tooling"... well. That's your call. Thankfully after a dozen or so retros the low hanging fruit starts to disappear. But until then, you've no idea what's there.
  - cindyllm 2mo ago
    [dead]

dr_dshiv 2mo ago

Yes, I build into my gnite skill for closing conversations

karl_gluck 2mo ago

Agreed. After an implementation session, I often use: "did you notice any inconsistencies or opportunities to clarify/consolidate parameters or functionality while you were working?" Another strategy that has worked well for my MCP server is noticing a sequence of failed tool-calls, then returning a response that contains a request for the agent to provide feedback via a skill.

jagenabler2 2mo ago

I’m just holding out for when this stuff becomes mainstream and automatically built into tooling. I don’t want to hold a retro with my agent. I actually want to spend as little time as possible talking with it.

AlexErrant 2mo ago
Sure, you can "vibe/auto-retro". But in my experience the retro often results in "higher-order" structural changes. In starker terms: if you're ok with "vibe principles", "vibe invariants", "vibe lint-rules", "vibe skill updates", and "vibe agent-tooling"... well. That's your call. Thankfully after a dozen or so retros the low hanging fruit starts to disappear. But until then, you've no idea what's there.
- cindyllm 2mo ago
  [dead]