what I actually want from a Manus alternative: don't lose the plot halfway through
Summary
The author critiques AI agents for losing context in multi-step tasks and advocates for bounded tools like Runable to ensure reliability.
Similar Articles
The longer an agent runs, the less I care about the prompt
The author reflects on how long-running AI agents encounter failures unrelated to the initial prompt, arguing that environment design (tools, docs, validation, architecture rules) matters more. They discuss concepts like harness engineering, keeping AGENTS.md small, using linters, and evaluator agents, while noting the cost trade-offs.
An AI agent isn’t production-ready until a human can take over halfway through a run
The article argues that AI agents are not production-ready unless they allow human intervention mid-run, emphasizing the need for legible state, bounded permissions, and recovery paths over full autonomy.
After months of building agents, I've changed my mind about what matters most.
The author reflects on the challenges of moving AI agents from prototype to production, concluding that reliable orchestration and safeguarding mechanics are more critical than incremental model improvements.
Do you guys actually think AI agents can replace people for bigger tasks anytime soon?
The author reflects on the current limitations of AI agents for complex, long-running tasks, citing reliability issues and suggesting that agents are better suited for narrow, supervised tasks rather than full autonomy.
Anyone else feel like AI agents are amazing right up until things get complicated?
A reflection on the gap between impressive AI agent demos and dependable real-world execution, arguing that current agents excel at structured tasks but fail under unpredictable conditions, suggesting near-term AI roles will focus on narrow automation with human oversight.