@_overment: f-ck me. looks like in 24 hours I’ve created a tool that’s made all coding agents obsolete for me. still iterating, but…

X AI KOLs Timeline Tools
coding-agents llm agent-tool deterministic-hooks dynamic-triggers developer-tool

Summary

The author claims to have built a tool in 24 hours that makes existing coding agents obsolete, using deterministic hooks and dynamic triggers, and argues that current approaches like Claude Code are flawed.

f-ck me. looks like in 24 hours I’ve created a tool that’s made all coding agents obsolete for me. still iterating, but at this point I’m more than excited about the results I’m getting. this tool is based purely on my understanding of how LLMs and agents work, so it’s full of deterministic hooks and checks, but also dynamic triggers that can be picked by either me or the agent. for example: things like “skills” implemented in, let’s say, Claude Code are deeply flawed because they expect the LLM to follow additional instructions in a thread where there’s already a ton of other context. the same goes for system prompts and other “rules” we want an agent to follow. and the funny thing is that I don’t expect the typical user to be able to work with such a tool effectively, since it requires deep knowledge of what’s going on under the hood. it’s obvious to me why big labs or IDEs don’t follow this path YET, but I believe this is the direction we’re all heading as general awareness of language models and agents improves over time.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 07/01/26, 12:07 PM

f-ck me. looks like in 24 hours I’ve created a tool that’s made all coding agents obsolete for me.

still iterating, but at this point I’m more than excited about the results I’m getting.

this tool is based purely on my understanding of how LLMs and agents work, so it’s full of deterministic hooks and checks, but also dynamic triggers that can be picked by either me or the agent.

for example: things like “skills” implemented in, let’s say, Claude Code are deeply flawed because they expect the LLM to follow additional instructions in a thread where there’s already a ton of other context. the same goes for system prompts and other “rules” we want an agent to follow.

and the funny thing is that I don’t expect the typical user to be able to work with such a tool effectively, since it requires deep knowledge of what’s going on under the hood. it’s obvious to me why big labs or IDEs don’t follow this path YET, but I believe this is the direction we’re all heading as general awareness of language models and agents improves over time.

Similar Articles