← Back to context

Comment by julesrms

3 hours ago

HN seems to have had a stream of agent harness benchmarks floating past. And every time I wonder where the people who create these tests are looking when they're deciding which harnesses to test? Because right now nobody seems to bother testing mine! (https://juggler.studio)

I know Juggler's very new, but there's so much churn going on in this area that it's hard to know where I should be pushing it. It's hard to guess whether juggler's strengths would played well with a particular test like this, or made it look bad, all feedback about the kind of parameters people are interested in is useful to know when I'm deciding what to optimise.

2 comments

julesrms

Reply
kouteiheika  40 minutes ago

> And every time I wonder where the people who create these tests are looking when they're deciding which harnesses to test?

Well, everyone and their dog has a custom harness now (including myself!), and more often than not they're just... pretty much the same, just with a slightly tweaked UI and different defaults? The harness needs to either be one of the popular ones, or have some sort of a unique feature which actually differentiates how it runs, not just how it looks/controls like.

For example, one of the unique features of my harness is that the filesystem is completely virtualized and all filesystem I/O is part of the session. This means that any files the agent modifies aren't actually modified on disk until the user uses `/apply`, and rewinding the session also rewinds the state of the disk, and this works for all I/O and all tools (including anything spawned by the `bash` tool), and also supports at-will forking of the session including the filesystem state. This means that the agent can run fully YOLO and won't be able to nuke your disk, and it also means that there's no need to use git worktrees and such because multiple agents can just run in the same directory at the same time without an issue.

Essentially, what I'm trying to say: I'd love to see more experimentation in the harness space which doesn't just involve "a different GUI".