Agent configs can pass validation and still be bad instructions. What should we lint before runtime?
Summary
The author built LintLang, a deterministic linter for agent configs that catches structural language defects like vague tool descriptions and conflicting instructions before runtime, and notes that Character.AI's Larch framework adopted it in CI. The post asks developers which runtime failures should be caught statically.
Similar Articles
@nateberkopec: Automatic linter rules that are draconian for humans but effective for agents: 1. Cyclomatic complexity budget 2. LOC-p…
The tweet discusses automatic linter rules like cyclomatic complexity budgets and CSS/JS restrictions that are strict for humans but effective for coding agents, with Sam Saffron highlighting their role in preventing long-term code rot.
built an agent where the LLM is structurally forbidden from writing the final output. looking for feedback + people willing to break it
The author describes an AI agent designed to reproduce production Python crashes using LangGraph, featuring a unique architecture where the LLM plans actions but deterministic Python functions generate the final test code to ensure reliability.
Skills are new linters
The author argues that using AI skills to automate code quality checks replicates the same memory and reliability issues that linters were originally designed to solve, questioning the effectiveness of LLM-based skills as replacements.
I benchmarked AutoGen, CrewAI, LangGraph, and MetaGPT against my own Agent OS. The "LLM-as-a-judge" paradigm is completely broken. Here is the local data.
The article benchmarks five AI agent frameworks on a strict Rust coding task, showing that those using LLM judges often fail or hallucinate success, while mechanical grounding approaches yield more reliable results.
Giving an AI coding agent a deterministic "architecture linter" so it stops faking "done"
The article describes giving an AI coding agent a deterministic architecture linter that checks Event Storming diagrams for mechanical gaps and open questions, ensuring the agent doesn't fake completion.