Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There is a step missing. Impolitely list what's wrong and try to incorporate any persistent themes into a markdown file so that the agent stops making the same mistakes. Put any rules into linters and static analysis and sanitizers and ...

I sometimes see people reviewing LLM code leaving the same review comments multiple times, or worse, after some time they just give up reviewing.



Yep, if you’re not building guardrails, using an LLM is effectively just gambling until you get a non-broken output.


I 100% agree on the automated guardrails.

The part where you add instructions into a document is a bit of hit and miss. If they’re general enough it works but at my employer they have gone all out and have LLMs writing instructions that are committed to repos. There’s also a bunch of tools enforcing security instructions that usually just make the model confused (it starts arguing against the instructions randomly in the middle of performing a task). The agents are “stuttering” on most tasks because of the bloated instructions.


Yeah, workflows like ruff then ruff --fix are ideal, or just outright banning certain libraries, or having policies like dependency cool downs.

It's funny because we're once again speed running what the best practices already are!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: