upvote
I don't know if you deliberately cut-off the full point, but for the benefit of those with tired eyes I said 'feedback mechanisms', i.e. feedback in the control system sense.
reply
The cut-off was not intended but what is the correct one? Is it wrong as soon the result is wrong?
reply
We are still in early days and I'm sure this isn't the best way to approach this but here is what I do.

1. Agent context with platform/system idiosyncrasies, how to access tools, this is actually kept pretty minimal - and a line directing it to the plan document.

2. A plan document on how to make changes to the repo and work that needs to be done. This is a living document pruned by the orchestrating agent. Included in this document is a directive written by you to use, update the document after ever run. Here also is a guide on benchmarking, regression, unit tests that need to be performed every time.

2a. When an agent has a code change it is then analyzed by a council of subagents, each focused on a different area, some examples, security, maintainability, system architect, business domain expert. I encourage these to be adversarial "red team". We sit in the core loop until the code changes pass through the council.

2b. Additional subagents to create documentation, build architecture diagrams etc.

2c. A suggested workflow is created on how to independently invoke testing, and subagent, etc.

reply