Comment by ithkuil

I'm trying to learn how to write software with agents where I keep control over the design while yielding control over the implementation.

This is not very different from what already happens to architects that delegate implementation to teams.

The challenge Is to find a way to encode the architecture in a way that both you and the agents can understand and agree on.

I'm still learning how to do this effectively, but my initial experience is quite positive. Not because agents are great but because humans are bad; the degree of coherence I've seen agents following is bigger than many human teams I've led in my career.

My benchmark is a quite big project for which the architecture is already well known, namely the reimplementation of the OpenVMS OS (kernel and user-land). There are many traps and many opportunities for the agents to just go ahead and diverge from the goals, so I found it a good playground toearn how reign them in but let them be effective at "drawing the rest of the owl"