Developing AI Agents

Lately, I’ve been getting a lot of questions around the difference between 𝗚𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗔𝗜, 𝗔𝗜 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀, and 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗰 𝗔𝗜. Here’s how I usually explain it — without the jargon. 𝗚𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗔𝗜 This is what most people think of when they hear “AI.” It can write blog posts, generate images, help you code, and more. It’s like a super-smart assistant — but only when you ask. No initiative. No memory. No goals. Tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and GitHub Copilot fall into this bucket. 𝗔𝗜 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 Now we’re talking action. An AI Agent doesn’t just answer questions — it 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀. It can: • Plan tasks • Use tools • Interact with APIs • Loop through steps until the job is done Think of it like a junior teammate that can handle a process from start to finish — with minimal handholding. 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗰 𝗔𝗜 This is where things get interesting. Agentic AI is not just about completing a single task. It’s about having 𝗴𝗼𝗮𝗹𝘀, 𝗺𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗿𝘆, and the ability to 𝗮𝗱𝗮𝗽𝘁. It’s the difference between: "Write me a summary" vs. "Go read 50 research papers, summarize the key trends, update my Notion, and ping me if there’s anything game-changing." Agentic AI behaves more like a 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺 than a chatbot. It can collaborate, improve over time, and even work alongside other agents. Personally, I think we’re just scratching the surface of what agentic systems can do. We’re moving from building apps to 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗳𝗹𝗼𝘄𝘀. And that’s a massive shift. Curious to hear from others building in this space — what tools or frameworks are you experimenting with? LangGraph, AutoGen, CrewAI ?

Anthropic 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗮 𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗶𝗴𝗵𝗹𝘆 𝗽𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗻 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱 𝗲𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗔𝗜 𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 — 𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹-𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀: ⬇️ Not just marketing, BUT a real, practical blueprint for developers and teams building AI agents that actually work. It explains how Claude Code (tool for agentic coding) can function as a software developer: writing, reviewing, testing, and even managing Git workflows autonomously. BUT in my view: The principles and patterns described in this document are not Claude-specific. You can apply them to any coding agent — from OpenAI’s Codex to Goose, Aider, or even tools like Cursor and GitHub Copilot Workspace. 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 7 𝗸𝗲𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗔𝗜 𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 — 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱: ⬇️ 1. 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻 ≠ 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 ➜ It’s not about clever prompts. It’s about building structured workflows — where the agent can reason, act, reflect, retry, and escalate. Think of agents like software components: stateless functions won’t cut it. 2. 𝗠𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 ➜ The way you manage and pass context determines how useful your agent becomes. Using summaries, structured files, project overviews, and scoped retrieval beats dumping full files into the prompt window. 3. 𝗣𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗼𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 ➜ You can’t expect an agent to solve multi-step problems without an explicit process. Patterns like plan > execute > review, tool use when stuck, or structured reflection are necessary. And they apply to all models, not just Claude. 4. 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗹-𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹-𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗼𝗼𝗹𝘀 ➜ Shell access. Git. APIs. Tool plugins. The agents that actually get things done use tools — not just language. Design your agents to execute, not just explain. 5. 𝗥𝗲𝗔𝗰𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗖𝗼𝗧 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝘀, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗸𝘀 ➜ Don’t just ask the model to “think step by step.” Build systems that enforce that structure: reasoning before action, planning before code, feedback before commits. 6. 𝗗𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗮𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝘆 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗼𝘀 ➜ Autonomous agents can cause damage — fast. Define scopes, boundaries, fallback behaviors. Controlled autonomy > random retries. 7. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 ➜ A good agent isn’t just a wrapper around an LLM. It’s an orchestrator: of logic, memory, tools, and feedback. And if you’re scaling to multi-agent setups — orchestration is everything. Check the comments for the original material! Enjoy! Save 💾 ➞ React 👍 ➞ Share ♻️ & follow for everything related to AI Agents!

AI Agent vs Agentic AI Most people use the terms AI Agent and Agentic AI like they mean the same thing. They don’t. The difference isn’t just semantic. It’s architectural. Here’s how the tech stack evolves from AI Agent → Agentic AI 👇 1. Intelligence models - AI Agent typically relies on a single LLM with prompt → response workflows. - Agentic AI moves toward multi-model reasoning, planner–executor setups, and hybrid inference across systems. 2. Architecture & frameworks - AI Agent often follows a single-agent, linear execution flow. - Agentic AI introduces multi-agent systems, goal-driven workflows, and orchestration frameworks like LangGraph, CrewAI, or AutoGen. 3. Memory systems - AI Agent works with session memory, short-term embeddings, and basic caches. - Agentic AI adds long-term memory layers, episodic + semantic memory, knowledge graphs, and vector databases. 4. Tool usage & actions - AI Agent uses predefined tools and function calling triggered by users. - Agentic AI autonomously selects tools, plans multi-step executions, interacts with environments, and uses structured tool registries. 5. Knowledge & retrieval - AI Agent typically uses basic RAG pipelines with static retrieval. - Agentic AI evolves into adaptive RAG, context prioritization, hybrid search, and continuously updated knowledge graphs. 6. Orchestration & workflows - AI Agent runs sequential flows and simple backend automation. - Agentic AI uses orchestration engines, planning loops, event-driven workflows, and reflection cycles. 7. Decision making - AI Agent is reactive and prompt-driven. - Agentic AI is goal-oriented, with planning, self-evaluation, and iterative reasoning loops. 8. Deployment - AI Agent is often deployed as chatbots, copilots, or API-based assistants. - Agentic AI becomes autonomous platforms, digital workforce agents, and persistent execution systems. 9. Monitoring & observability - Both need logs, monitoring, and error tracking but Agentic AI requires deeper analytics, response monitoring, and system-level feedback loops. 10. Learning & improvement - AI Agent improves through prompt iteration and occasional fine-tuning. - Agentic AI evolves through continuous feedback pipelines, performance adaptation, and evaluation frameworks. AI Agent = intelligent responder. Agentic AI = autonomous system with goals, memory, tools, and orchestration. One answers questions. The other executes objectives. Are you building smarter responses or autonomous systems?

Everyone's building AI agents, but few understand the Agentic frameworks that power them. These two distinct frameworks are the most used frameworks in 2025, and they aren't competitors but complementary approaches to agent development: 𝗻𝟴𝗻 (𝗩𝗶𝘀𝘂𝗮𝗹 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗳𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗔𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻) - Creates visual connections between AI agents and business tools - Flow: Trigger → AI Agent → Tools/APIs → Action - Solves integration complexity and enables rapid deployment - Think of it as the visual orchestrator connecting AI to your entire tech stack 𝗟𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗵 (𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗵-𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗢𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻) by LangChain - Enables stateful, cyclical agent workflows with precise control - Flow: State → Agents → Conditional Logic → State (cycles) - Solves complex reasoning and multi-step agent coordination - Think of it as the brain that manages sophisticated agent decision-making Beyond technicality, each framework has its core strengths. 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗻𝟴𝗻: - Integrating AI agents with existing business tools - Building customer support automation - Creating no-code AI workflows for teams - Needing quick deployment with 700+ integrations 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗟𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗵: - Building complex multi-agent reasoning systems - Creating enterprise-grade AI applications - Developing agents with cyclical workflows - Needing fine-grained state management Both frameworks are gaining significant traction: 𝗻𝟴𝗻 𝗘𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺: - Visual workflow builder for non-developers - Self-hostable open-source option - Strong business automation community 𝗟𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗵 𝗘𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺: - Full LangChain ecosystem integration - LangSmith observability and debugging - Advanced state persistence capabilities Top AI solutions integrate both n8n and LangGraph to maximize their potential. - Use n8n for visual orchestration and business tool integration - Use LangGraph for complex agent logic and state management - Think in layers: business automation AND sophisticated reasoning Over to you: What AI agent use case would you build - one that needs visual simplicity (n8n) or complex orchestration (LangGraph)?

Automation, AI workflow, or AI agent? To always 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥, follow this 𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬: Remember when I explained why many "𝘈𝘐 𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴" shared on LinkedIn are actually 𝘈𝘐 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘧𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘴 or 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 in disguise? Turns out: understanding the difference is only partially helpful. The real challenge is knowing 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘦. So I built this framework to help you decide. There are 6 key dimensions to consider - working in pairs: 𝐏𝐚𝐢𝐫 #1: 𝐃𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧-𝐌𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 ↔️ 𝐇𝐮𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐨𝐥𝐯𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 aka. how decisions are made - and how much human intervention is required: → 𝘈𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯: You make ALL decisions upfront when designing your automation, which means that no human intervention is needed after. → 𝘈𝘐 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘧𝘭𝘰𝘸: You set boundaries for the AI to operate within; humans occasionally review outputs or intervene when the system encounters edge cases. → 𝘈𝘐 𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘵: You set high-level goals, and AI determines its own path; this means humans need to provide ongoing feedback to ensure it makes the right decisions. 𝐏𝐚𝐢𝐫 #2: 𝐃𝐚𝐭𝐚 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 ↔️ 𝐀𝐝𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 a.k.a which type of data the system should process - and how adaptable it has to be: → 𝘈𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯: Requires strictly predefined data formats with no deviation; breaks when encountering unexpected inputs and needs to be re-engineered when processes change. → 𝘈𝘐 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘧𝘭𝘰𝘸: Handles mostly structured data with some variability allowed; can adjust to parameter variations within defined parameters but needs guidance for significant changes. → 𝘈𝘐 𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘵: Processes diverse unstructured data across multiple sources with varying formats; independently adapts to different inputs and shifting environments without reprogramming. 𝐏𝐚𝐢𝐫 #3: 𝐑𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 ↔️ 𝐑𝐢𝐬𝐤 𝐓𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 a.k.a how predictable the outcomes must be - and what level of risk is acceptable: → 𝘈𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯: Delivers highly consistent, predictable results every time; ideal for mission-critical processes where errors cannot be tolerated and predictability is essential. → 𝘈𝘐 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘧𝘭𝘰𝘸: Produces mostly reliable outcomes with occasional variations in edge cases; balances flexibility with guardrails to prevent major errors while allowing some adaptability. → 𝘈𝘐 𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘵: Creates outcomes that can vary significantly between iterations; optimized for scenarios where discovering novel approaches and adaptability outweigh the need for consistent results. How to use this framework: Always 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵 and move right only when necessary. 1. Start with automation 2. Move to AI workflows when you need more flexibility within guardrails  3. Only move to agents when you need high adaptability Don’t fall for the AI agent hype - most processes can be automated without agents.

OpenAI's agent pricing isn't about AI at all. It's about the future of work. $2,000/month for knowledge workers $10,000/month for developers $20,000/month for PhD-level researchers The $20,000/month agent isn't the story. It's what happens next. It's the beginning of an economic reorganization we haven't seen since the Industrial Revolution. Here's what's really happening: → Traditional knowledge hierarchies are collapsing → The professional services model is being challenged → Career development pathways are vanishing → Size advantage is reversing completely We have seen this movie before: 1995: Internet eliminated information gatekeepers 2000: Enterprise software changed workflows 2011: Cloud democratized technology infrastructure This time is different. We're not just automating tasks – we're eliminating entire knowledge categories. Knowledge hierarchies were built because information had to flow up and decisions had to flow down. That entire paradigm is now shattering: → Middle management (20% of workforce) hollows out → A manager has 50+ agents instead of 7-10 humans → Companies maintain output with 70% smaller teams The impact will hit professional services first and hardest. Every consulting firm, law practice, and advisory business is built on the same foundations: time-based billing, junior staff leverage, and utilization rates. Agents obliterate each assumption: → Production time collapses by 90% → Junior roles vanish when agents handle analysis → Utilization metrics become meaningless when work scales infinitely The math is simple: A $240K/year PhD-level agent costs the same as 2-3 human PhDs but works 24/7 with no benefits, vacation, or turnover. It can handle 5-10x the workload of a single researcher. MBB, Big 4, and AmLaw 100 firms will see their entire model challenged as power dynamics are completely inverting. For decades, scale meant competitive advantage. Not anymore. The winners won't be the biggest firms. They'll be the fastest to rebuild around agent augmentation. This transformation creates three imperatives: → Organizations must adapt their structures now → Teams need to reimagine how work gets distributed → Leaders must reconsider where human value truly lies The long-term shift isn't just a technology change – it's a fundamental rewiring of economic value creation. Those who recognize this early will thrive; those who wait will find themselves playing catch-up in an entirely new landscape. The real divide isn't between humans and machines. It's between those who recognize this shift early and those who deny it until it's too late. How is your business adapting to the changing landscape?

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝟰𝟬% 𝗼𝗳 𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗰 𝗔𝗜 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗯𝗲 𝗮𝗯𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘆 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟳? It’s not the agents. It’s not the tools. It’s the architecture. Agentic AI is the next frontier, systems where multiple autonomous agents plan, reason, and communicate to solve complex tasks. But many teams build agent demos in notebooks, then hit a brick wall trying to productionize. The real problem? Most agentic AI efforts start as fragile experiments without a solid engineering backbone. What goes wrong? 1️⃣ Protocol Chaos When agent-to-agent messages aren’t standardized, everything breaks. Successful teams use MCP (Model Context Protocol) and clean registries from day one. 2️⃣ Tool Fragmentation Hard-coding tools inside agents might work for a demo, but modular tool interfaces are critical for scale and future maintenance. 3️⃣ Missing Coordination Layer Multiple agents with no shared planner? That’s a recipe for confusion. A well-defined coordinator module is essential. 4️⃣ No Communication Bus Agent communication without a message bus quickly turns into spaghetti code. The solution? Architect for production on day one: - Clear separation of config - Modular tool orchestration - Robust communication protocols - Reasoning and planning layers Building agentic systems isn’t just prompt engineering. It’s designing a multi-agent architecture that can actually survive the real world. #AgenticAI #AIengineering #MCP #GenerativeAI

Guide to Building an AI Agent 1️⃣ 𝗖𝗵𝗼𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗟𝗟𝗠 Not all LLMs are equal. Pick one that: - Excels in reasoning benchmarks - Supports chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting - Delivers consistent responses 📌 Tip: Experiment with models & fine-tune prompts to enhance reasoning. 2️⃣ 𝗗𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁’𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 𝗟𝗼𝗴𝗶𝗰 Your agent needs a strategy: - Tool Use: Call tools when needed; otherwise, respond directly. - Basic Reflection: Generate, critique, and refine responses. - ReAct: Plan, execute, observe, and iterate. - Plan-then-Execute: Outline all steps first, then execute. 📌 Choosing the right approach improves reasoning & reliability. 3️⃣ 𝗗𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 & 𝗙𝗲𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲𝘀 Set operational rules: - How to handle unclear queries? (Ask clarifying questions) - When to use external tools? - Formatting rules? (Markdown, JSON, etc.) - Interaction style? 📌 Clear system prompts shape agent behavior. 4️⃣ 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗮 𝗠𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 LLMs forget past interactions. Memory strategies: - Sliding Window: Retain recent turns, discard old ones. - Summarized Memory: Condense key points for recall. - Long-Term Memory: Store user preferences for personalization. 📌 Example: A financial AI recalls risk tolerance from past chats. 5️⃣ 𝗘𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗽 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗧𝗼𝗼𝗹𝘀 & 𝗔𝗣𝗜𝘀 Extend capabilities with external tools: - Name: Clear, intuitive (e.g., "StockPriceRetriever") - Description: What does it do? - Schemas: Define input/output formats - Error Handling: How to manage failures? 📌 Example: A support AI retrieves order details via CRM API. 6️⃣ 𝗗𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁’𝘀 𝗥𝗼𝗹𝗲 & 𝗞𝗲𝘆 𝗧𝗮𝘀𝗸𝘀 Narrowly defined agents perform better. Clarify: - Mission: (e.g., "I analyze datasets for insights.") - Key Tasks: (Summarizing, visualizing, analyzing) - Limitations: ("I don’t offer legal advice.") 📌 Example: A financial AI focuses on finance, not general knowledge. 7️⃣ 𝗛𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗥𝗮𝘄 𝗟𝗟𝗠 𝗢𝘂𝘁𝗽𝘂𝘁𝘀 Post-process responses for structure & accuracy: - Convert AI output to structured formats (JSON, tables) - Validate correctness before user delivery - Ensure correct tool execution 📌 Example: A financial AI converts extracted data into JSON. 8️⃣ 𝗦𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗠𝘂𝗹𝘁𝗶-𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗦𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺𝘀 (𝗔𝗱𝘃𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗱) For complex workflows: - Info Sharing: What context is passed between agents? - Error Handling: What if one agent fails? - State Management: How to pause/resume tasks? 📌 Example: 1️⃣ One agent fetches data 2️⃣ Another summarizes 3️⃣ A third generates a report Master the fundamentals, experiment, and refine and.. now go build something amazing! Happy agenting! 🤖

A new MIT and Harvard study just explained why AI agents could rewrite the structure of business itself. Not by automating tasks, but by collapsing coordination. The paper, “Demand, Supply, and Market Design with AI Agents”, introduces what it calls the Coasean Singularity. It describes a world where the cost of coordinating work, trade, and trust falls close to zero. Ronald Coase’s 1937 insight was simple but profound: Firms exist because markets are expensive to use. Every department, meeting, and process we build is a workaround for human friction like search, negotiation, and enforcement. Now AI agents are starting to handle those frictions directly. → Matching suppliers faster than procurement teams → Negotiating logistics in seconds → Soon, completing contracts machine-to-machine, with humans only reviewing exceptions When coordination costs fall, the shape of the firm begins to change. We start to move from hierarchies to networks, from organisations to orchestrations. The economy begins to behave more like software than structure. And when coordination becomes almost free, something new happens. Entirely new markets appear. Agents make it viable to trade micro-services, on-demand data, or one-off insights that were once too small or complex to coordinate. The long tail of the economy comes alive. The paper also argues that efficiency creates a new constraint: alignment. When every buyer and seller has an agent acting on their behalf, markets no longer run on trust. They run on how well those agents understand what we truly value. Market design becomes a question of alignment, not just speed. At the same time, the largest platforms are already tightening control of their ecosystems. Meta plans to block external AI models from WhatsApp Business. Amazon is restricting autonomous crawlers and agents across its retail platform. These are not small policy changes. They are early signs of a power struggle over who governs the agentic economy. If agents become the main interface between humans and commerce, those who control the gateways will decide how value flows. Forward-looking companies are preparing for this. They are rethinking how coordination itself happens, building open agent ecosystems, shared standards, and transparent protocols before the walls close in. Beyond economics lies another challenge: identity. As agents transact on our behalf, the real bottleneck will be trust. Which agents represent real people? Which are synthetic? Proof-of-personhood and verification will become the foundation of digital markets. AI will not replace capitalism overnight. But it is already rewiring the plumbing of coordination, one process, one decision, and one transaction at a time. P.S. If your 2025 plan still treats AI as a feature rather than infrastructure, you are building for the wrong outcome. How will your business operate when every process can think, bargain, and act, yet still needs human judgement to guide it?

If you’re getting started with AI agents, this is for you 👇 I’ve seen so many builders jump straight into wiring up LangChain or CrewAI without ever understanding what actually makes an LLM act like an agent, and not just a glorified autocomplete engine. I put together a 10-phase roadmap to help you go from foundational concepts → all the way to building, deploying, and scaling multi-agent systems in production. Phase 1: Understand what “agentic AI” actually means → What makes an agent different from a chatbot → Why long-context alone isn’t enough → How tools, memory, and environment drive reasoning Phase 2: Learn the core components → LLM = brain → Memory = context (short + long term) → Tools = actuators → Environment = where the agent runs Phase 3: Prompting for agents → System vs user prompts → Role-based task prompting → Prompt chaining with state tracking → Format constraints and expected outputs Phase 4: Build your first basic agent → Start with a single-task agent → Use UI (Claude or GPT) before code → Iterate prompt → observe behavior → refine Phase 5: Add memory → Use buffers for short-term recall → Integrate vector DBs for long-term → Enable retrieval via user queries → Keep session memory dynamically updated Phase 6: Add tools and external APIs → Function calling = where things get real → Connect search, calendar, custom APIs → Handle agent I/O with guardrails → Test tool behaviors in isolation Phase 7: Build full single-agent workflows → Prompt → Memory → Tool → Response → Add error handling + fallbacks → Use LangGraph or n8n for orchestration → Log actions for replay/debugging Phase 8: Multi-agent coordination → Assign roles (planner, executor, critic) → Share context and working memory → Use A2A/TAP for agent-to-agent messaging → Test decision workflows in teams Phase 9: Deploy and monitor → Host on Replit, Vercel, Render → Monitor tokens, latency, error rates → Add API rate limits + safety rules → Setup logging, alerts, dashboards Phase 10: Join the builder ecosystem → Use Model Context Protocol (MCP) → Contribute to LangChain, CrewAI, AutoGen → Test on open evals (EvalProtocol, SWE-bench, etc.) → Share workflows, follow updates, build in public This is the same path I recommend to anyone transitioning from prompting → to building production-grade agents. Save it. Share it. And let me know what phase you’re in, or where you’re stuck. 〰️〰️〰️ Follow me (Aishwarya Srinivasan) for more AI insight and subscribe to my Substack to find more in-depth blogs and weekly updates in AI: https://lnkd.in/dpBNr6Jg