Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Pawel Jozefiak's avatar

The state machine framing is useful. Understanding coding agents as state machines that transition between planning, executing, and verifying helps explain why some agent setups work and others don't. What I've found in practice is that the verification state is where most implementations fall short. My agent has a strict rule: never mark a task complete without proving it works. Run the code, check the output, test edge cases, show proof. That single constraint improved reliability more than any model upgrade. The MCP section is also relevant. Having standardized tool integration means agents can extend their own capabilities systematically. I explored this architecture in depth: https://thoughts.jock.pl/p/ai-agent-self-extending-self-fixing-wiz-rebuild-technical-deep-dive-2026

Matan Giladi's avatar

Nice breakdown! One concept I expected to gain traction but hasn't is meta-prompting - dynamically enriching prompts with contextual instructions before executing them, rather than relying on static generic rules or late compensation by other tools. For example, we use it in Apiiro to weave contextual security guidance into coding prompts of our customers, resulting in very secure code generation. Are you familiar with any notable use cases? Do you see this approach becoming more prevalent?

3 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?