Might poke around...
What makes something a good potential tool, if the shell command can (technically) can do anything - like running tests?
(or it is just the things requiring user permission vs not?)
Might poke around...
What makes something a good potential tool, if the shell command can (technically) can do anything - like running tests?
(or it is just the things requiring user permission vs not?)
The shell command can run anything really. When I tested it, it asked me multiple times to run the tests and then I could see it fixing the tests in iterations. Very interesting to observe.
If I was to improve this to be a better Ruby agent (which I don't plan to do, at least not yet), I would probably try adding some Rspec/Minitest specific tools that would parse the response and present it back to the LLM in a cleaned up format.
(Like - what would it look like to clean up test results for an LLM?)
I'm being serious. This sounds like a fun project but I have to turn my attention to other projects for the near future. This was more of an experiment for me, but it would be cool to see someone try out that idea.
Think of it as -semantic- wrappers so the LLM can -decide- what action to take at any given moment given its context, the user prompt, and available tools names and descriptions.
creating wrappers for the most used basic tools even if they all pipe to terminal unix commands can be useful.
also giving it speicif knowledge base it can consult on demand like a wiki of its own stack etc
but yeah