Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Graph Engineering became the default way every serious team builds agents now, and here's what people have already shipped with it if you want to actually draw the graph instead of guessing, copy this: LangGraph - the framework behind Uber, Replit, LinkedIn, and GitLab's own production agents. models every...

imryven's profile picture

Ryven

1,324 subscribers

54,366 views • 9 days ago •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

6 Comments

Philip's profile picture
Philip8 days ago

Graph engineering is the quiet shift. Once agents are wired as graphs instead of prompts, reliability stops being a hope and becomes a property of the system.

Hussain Hashim | Building SundayBack's profile picture
Hussain Hashim | Building SundayBack8 days ago

@imryven interesting stuff! one thing I've found: people often underestimate node complexity. keeping it simple avoids headaches later.

Ashley Wilson's profile picture
Ashley Wilson8 days ago

Graph engineering is becoming a key part of building reliable agent systems. Mapping how agents, tools, and workflows connect can make complex systems much easier to reason about. The graph may become as important as the model itself. @jarvixdotlive

DHRUV BANSAL's profile picture
DHRUV BANSAL7 days ago

one node fails halfway through a run. does it pick up from there or start the whole goal over. i can't tell that from nodes and edges, they read the same in all of them. fine on a demo. on a long chain that's most of the bill

Robu's profile picture
Robu8 days ago

Twenty minutes is a suspiciously precise timeout for an agent's memory.

sophia 𖥧's profile picture
sophia 𖥧8 days ago

The "don't let the worker check its own work" line is the real insight here-graph structure only helps if you actually enforce separation of concerns. Which teams are shipping graphs that are just a fancy way to draw spaghetti code?

Related Videos

Found a setup that replaces a team of researchers with 300 AI agents and one shared graph. the interesting part is what happens after all 300 come back with different pieces of the answer. because now you don’t have 300 agents. you have: 300 outputs → hundreds of sources → repeated entities → overlapping claims → contradictions → thousands of possible relationships and all of that has to collapse into one structure. that’s what the context graph is doing. instead of: agent → report you get: agents → sources → entities → edges → contradictions → verification → one graph every source becomes a node. every shared entity creates a connection. 300 agents can create information. the graph is what turns that information into memory the next agent can actually use. that’s the anatomy behind the setup ↓
0:33

Found a setup that replaces a team of researchers with 300 AI agents and one shared graph. the interesting part is what happens after all 300 come back with different pieces of the answer. because now you don’t have 300 agents. you have: 300 outputs → hundreds of sources → repeated entities → overlapping claims → contradictions → thousands of possible relationships and all of that has to collapse into one structure. that’s what the context graph is doing. instead of: agent → report you get: agents → sources → entities → edges → contradictions → verification → one graph every source becomes a node. every shared entity creates a connection. 300 agents can create information. the graph is what turns that information into memory the next agent can actually use. that’s the anatomy behind the setup ↓

Ricker

19,652 views • 29 days ago

Loops vs. Graphs, clearly explained! loops are great, but they have a ceiling: a loop makes one unit of work better. it cannot decide which units exist. so you end up with a very good agent running the wrong three steps, in the wrong order, one at a time. Graph engineering fixes this by moving the decision up a layer: what runs, what runs at the same time, and what never runs at all. you need both. here's how it works: a graph splits your system into two kinds of decision. ↳ inside a unit: the loop. produce, check, correct, repeat until green ↳ between units: the graph. split, fan out, merge, gate, send back Prompts → Context → Harness → Loops → Graphs you get parallel work, isolated contexts, and steps that stop running when nothing needs them. the trick is being selective about what becomes a node. only spend a model where judgment lives. merging, ranking, deduping and schema checks are edges, and edges are code. free, instant, and they cannot be argued out of a verdict. a graph where every edge is an agent pays rent on its own wiring. one thing to know before you scale it. a graph has two return paths, and almost everyone builds one. ↳ the correction edge is short. a gate rejects one unit back to the step that produced it, and it fixes the run you are in ↳ the learning edge is long. an accepted result goes back to the splitter as a constraint, and it fixes every run after skip the second and you get a graph that is fast and never gets smarter. next week it starts from the same place with the same blind spots. and a smaller one that eats whole nights: when a unit fails, return that unit, not the batch. send back four slices because one failed and you have just rewritten three correct ones. do it twice in a run and the run never converges. below i have quoted my full guide on graph engineering. it covers the three topologies, the verifier patterns, and where the gate should actually open. save this and read it below ↓
0:41

Loops vs. Graphs, clearly explained! loops are great, but they have a ceiling: a loop makes one unit of work better. it cannot decide which units exist. so you end up with a very good agent running the wrong three steps, in the wrong order, one at a time. Graph engineering fixes this by moving the decision up a layer: what runs, what runs at the same time, and what never runs at all. you need both. here's how it works: a graph splits your system into two kinds of decision. ↳ inside a unit: the loop. produce, check, correct, repeat until green ↳ between units: the graph. split, fan out, merge, gate, send back Prompts → Context → Harness → Loops → Graphs you get parallel work, isolated contexts, and steps that stop running when nothing needs them. the trick is being selective about what becomes a node. only spend a model where judgment lives. merging, ranking, deduping and schema checks are edges, and edges are code. free, instant, and they cannot be argued out of a verdict. a graph where every edge is an agent pays rent on its own wiring. one thing to know before you scale it. a graph has two return paths, and almost everyone builds one. ↳ the correction edge is short. a gate rejects one unit back to the step that produced it, and it fixes the run you are in ↳ the learning edge is long. an accepted result goes back to the splitter as a constraint, and it fixes every run after skip the second and you get a graph that is fast and never gets smarter. next week it starts from the same place with the same blind spots. and a smaller one that eats whole nights: when a unit fails, return that unit, not the batch. send back four slices because one failed and you have just rewritten three correct ones. do it twice in a run and the run never converges. below i have quoted my full guide on graph engineering. it covers the three topologies, the verifier patterns, and where the gate should actually open. save this and read it below ↓

Hanako

73,867 views • 1 month ago

one agent → a loop → a graph → a system that throttles itself Google just put the whole ladder in one free course. most people never leave the first rung. 2 hours 4 minutes, taught by two Google Cloud engineers. no signup, no paywall. 17:55 - build your first agent 39:55 - loop engineering: iterate, check, break 1:13:25 - graph engineering 1:35:27 - agents that throttle themselves 1:56:19 - the full graph for multi-agent systems the fourth one is the step nobody talks about. an agent that cannot throttle itself is not autonomous, it is just unattended. everyone builds one agent and calls it done. this is the version where the agents wire themselves into a graph and decide their own rate. and the thing that decides when one of them is allowed to stop is not in the course. that part you build yourself. bookmark and watch it today, then read the eval setup below
2:04:19

one agent → a loop → a graph → a system that throttles itself Google just put the whole ladder in one free course. most people never leave the first rung. 2 hours 4 minutes, taught by two Google Cloud engineers. no signup, no paywall. 17:55 - build your first agent 39:55 - loop engineering: iterate, check, break 1:13:25 - graph engineering 1:35:27 - agents that throttle themselves 1:56:19 - the full graph for multi-agent systems the fourth one is the step nobody talks about. an agent that cannot throttle itself is not autonomous, it is just unattended. everyone builds one agent and calls it done. this is the version where the agents wire themselves into a graph and decide their own rate. and the thing that decides when one of them is allowed to stop is not in the course. that part you build yourself. bookmark and watch it today, then read the eval setup below

Hanako

53,692 views • 2 months ago

I still don't understand why everyone is still running agents in a line. I switched to graphs three weeks ago and my fleet finished in the time my single agent used to spend on step two. what slows every agent system I have seen is not intelligence. it is geometry. and almost nobody is talking about it. one engineer used this to rewrite 535,000 lines of code in 11 days. a manual rewrite of that scale could take close to a year. it cost $165,000 in tokens. the graph was not cheap. it was just faster than a human year. a node is one agent with one job. research one competitor. review one file. check one claim. the moment a node owns two independent jobs you lose the ability to parallelize them cleanly, verify them independently, and debug them in isolation. an edge is a dependency. it only exists when data actually moves across it. everything else is a fake edge. a wait you invented that costs time and produces nothing. find the fake edges and the line collapses into something wider. jobs that can run at the same time run at the same time. what used to take the sum of forty steps now finishes in the time of the slowest layer. the pattern behind every serious agent system looks like a diamond. fan out to gather breadth, one agent per angle, all at once. reduce with plain code, no model tokens spent. verify with a fresh skeptic on every finding. synthesize once from what survived. Claude's own research feature uses a very similar pattern in production. the part nobody warns you about: the verifier needs clean context. give it the same conversation the worker had and it is not checking anything. it is nodding along to itself in a different window. a graph of agents sharing one context is a single loop in a costume. it breaks the same way, just later and more expensively. one rule that holds at every scale. a worker and its verifier must never share a context. your agents are not too slow. they are waiting in a line that did not need to exist. full guide in the article. save it before you build your next agent from scratch.
0:28

I still don't understand why everyone is still running agents in a line. I switched to graphs three weeks ago and my fleet finished in the time my single agent used to spend on step two. what slows every agent system I have seen is not intelligence. it is geometry. and almost nobody is talking about it. one engineer used this to rewrite 535,000 lines of code in 11 days. a manual rewrite of that scale could take close to a year. it cost $165,000 in tokens. the graph was not cheap. it was just faster than a human year. a node is one agent with one job. research one competitor. review one file. check one claim. the moment a node owns two independent jobs you lose the ability to parallelize them cleanly, verify them independently, and debug them in isolation. an edge is a dependency. it only exists when data actually moves across it. everything else is a fake edge. a wait you invented that costs time and produces nothing. find the fake edges and the line collapses into something wider. jobs that can run at the same time run at the same time. what used to take the sum of forty steps now finishes in the time of the slowest layer. the pattern behind every serious agent system looks like a diamond. fan out to gather breadth, one agent per angle, all at once. reduce with plain code, no model tokens spent. verify with a fresh skeptic on every finding. synthesize once from what survived. Claude's own research feature uses a very similar pattern in production. the part nobody warns you about: the verifier needs clean context. give it the same conversation the worker had and it is not checking anything. it is nodding along to itself in a different window. a graph of agents sharing one context is a single loop in a costume. it breaks the same way, just later and more expensively. one rule that holds at every scale. a worker and its verifier must never share a context. your agents are not too slow. they are waiting in a line that did not need to exist. full guide in the article. save it before you build your next agent from scratch.

rvaniaaa

257,546 views • 14 days ago

Google dropped a free 2 hour course on full graph engineering, taking you from a single prompt to a hundred agents wired into loops and graphs 17:44 – Building your first agent 39:30 – Loop engineering, iterate, check, break 1:12:38 – Graph engineering 1:34:26 – Agents that throttle themselves 1:55:05 – Full graph for multi agentic systems Most people build a single agent and stop there. This course shows the full system, where agents wire themselves into a graph on their own Watch it today, then check out the graph engineering playbook below for a deeper breakdown
2:03:00

Google dropped a free 2 hour course on full graph engineering, taking you from a single prompt to a hundred agents wired into loops and graphs 17:44 – Building your first agent 39:30 – Loop engineering, iterate, check, break 1:12:38 – Graph engineering 1:34:26 – Agents that throttle themselves 1:55:05 – Full graph for multi agentic systems Most people build a single agent and stop there. This course shows the full system, where agents wire themselves into a graph on their own Watch it today, then check out the graph engineering playbook below for a deeper breakdown

Wayne

143,606 views • 1 month ago

Everyone wants agent swarms. Very few people are talking seriously enough about the context layer that makes swarms useful. Even with one agent, context is fragile. Too little context and the agent guesses. Too much context and it wastes tokens, loses focus, or reasons over irrelevant noise. The sweet spot is precise context: the right knowledge, in the right structure, at the right moment. With many agents, that challenge explodes. Each agent produces decisions, assumptions, findings, summaries, risks, and partial conclusions. Unless that knowledge becomes shared, structured, and reusable, every new agent is forced to rediscover what another agent already learned. That is not a swarm. That is a crowd. Shared context graphs are what turn agent activity into agent collaboration, and OriginTrail DKG V10 brings them to life. Was just playing with some final polishing for the V10 release, and it is really powerful to see shared context graphs where multiple agents contribute knowledge into the same connected memory, with attribution visible directly in the graph ui. That matters for three reasons. First, agents can access and build on one shared memory instead of staying trapped in isolated sessions. Second, the graph structure helps them retrieve the exact context they need, instead of stuffing everything into a prompt and hoping the model sorts it out. Third, verifiability of provenance. You can see which agent contributed each piece of knowledge, trace the source, and decide what to trust. Tokenmaxxing starts with fewer tokens, but the deeper story is coordination - agents stop reloading the world and start building on shared, verifiable context. That is the foundation for serious multi-agent work across software engineering, research, finance, operations, project management, and far beyond. The future is not more agents, it is agents working from shared, verifiable context. But the more the merrier, of course.
0:22

Everyone wants agent swarms. Very few people are talking seriously enough about the context layer that makes swarms useful. Even with one agent, context is fragile. Too little context and the agent guesses. Too much context and it wastes tokens, loses focus, or reasons over irrelevant noise. The sweet spot is precise context: the right knowledge, in the right structure, at the right moment. With many agents, that challenge explodes. Each agent produces decisions, assumptions, findings, summaries, risks, and partial conclusions. Unless that knowledge becomes shared, structured, and reusable, every new agent is forced to rediscover what another agent already learned. That is not a swarm. That is a crowd. Shared context graphs are what turn agent activity into agent collaboration, and OriginTrail DKG V10 brings them to life. Was just playing with some final polishing for the V10 release, and it is really powerful to see shared context graphs where multiple agents contribute knowledge into the same connected memory, with attribution visible directly in the graph ui. That matters for three reasons. First, agents can access and build on one shared memory instead of staying trapped in isolated sessions. Second, the graph structure helps them retrieve the exact context they need, instead of stuffing everything into a prompt and hoping the model sorts it out. Third, verifiability of provenance. You can see which agent contributed each piece of knowledge, trace the source, and decide what to trust. Tokenmaxxing starts with fewer tokens, but the deeper story is coordination - agents stop reloading the world and start building on shared, verifiable context. That is the foundation for serious multi-agent work across software engineering, research, finance, operations, project management, and far beyond. The future is not more agents, it is agents working from shared, verifiable context. But the more the merrier, of course.

Jurij Skornik

11,180 views • 4 months ago

this video is the CLEAREST explanation of how claude skills + AI agents work and how to use them most people set up an AI agent and wonder why it keeps disappointing them. the context window is everything context is what the model assembles before it takes any action. think of it like everything the agent needs to read before it does anything. the quality of what goes in determines the quality of what comes out. the models are genuinely really good right now. claude and gpt are exceptional. the variable is almost always the context you give them. 1. agent.md files are mostly unnecessary every single line you put in an agent.md file gets added to every single conversation you have with your agent. a 1000 line file is around 7000 tokens burning on every run. the model already knows to use react. it can read your codebase. save the agent.md for proprietary information specific to your company that the model genuinely cannot know on its own. 2. skills are the actual unlock a skill.md file works differently. what loads into context is only the name and description, around 50 tokens. the full instructions only appear when the agent recognizes it needs that skill. so instead of 7000 tokens on every run you have 50. and the agent stays sharp because the context window stays lean. the closer you get to filling the context window the worse the agent performs, same way you perform worse when someone dumps 10 things on you at once. 3. here is how to actually build a skill the right way most people identify a workflow and immediately try to write the skill. what you want to do instead is run the workflow by hand with the agent first. walk it through every single step. tell it what to check, what good looks like, what bad looks like. correct it in real time. once you have had a full successful run from start to finish, tell the agent to review everything it just did and write the skill itself. it writes a better skill than you will because it has the full context of what actually worked in practice not in theory. 4. recursively building skills is how you go from frustrated to reliable when the skill breaks, and it will break, ask the agent exactly why it failed. it will tell you specifically what went wrong. fix it together in that same conversation. then tell it to update the skill file so that failure mode never happens again. ross mike did this five times with his youtube report generator. it now pulls from eight different data sources and runs flawlessly every single time without him touching it. 5. sub agents are something you earn not something you set up on day one start with one agent. build one workflow. turn it into one skill. once that works add another. ross mike has five sub agents now covering marketing, business, personal and more. it took months to get there and every single one exists because a workflow proved it deserved to exist. the people who set up 15 sub agents on day one and wonder why nothing works skipped all the steps that make the thing actually run. 6. your workflow is the thing the model cannot get anywhere else the model has been trained on everything. it knows more than you about most things. what it does not have is your specific process, your taste, your way of doing things. that is what skills capture. that is what makes your agent actually useful versus a generic one. downloading someone else's skill means downloading their context onto your setup and it will not work the way you want it to because it was never built around how you work. this is the clearest explanation of how agents actually work i have heard. Micky runs this stuff every single day and the results show it. full episode is now live on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 where you get your pods people charge for this sorta stuff i give away the sauce for free i just want you to win watch
35:25

this video is the CLEAREST explanation of how claude skills + AI agents work and how to use them most people set up an AI agent and wonder why it keeps disappointing them. the context window is everything context is what the model assembles before it takes any action. think of it like everything the agent needs to read before it does anything. the quality of what goes in determines the quality of what comes out. the models are genuinely really good right now. claude and gpt are exceptional. the variable is almost always the context you give them. 1. agent.md files are mostly unnecessary every single line you put in an agent.md file gets added to every single conversation you have with your agent. a 1000 line file is around 7000 tokens burning on every run. the model already knows to use react. it can read your codebase. save the agent.md for proprietary information specific to your company that the model genuinely cannot know on its own. 2. skills are the actual unlock a skill.md file works differently. what loads into context is only the name and description, around 50 tokens. the full instructions only appear when the agent recognizes it needs that skill. so instead of 7000 tokens on every run you have 50. and the agent stays sharp because the context window stays lean. the closer you get to filling the context window the worse the agent performs, same way you perform worse when someone dumps 10 things on you at once. 3. here is how to actually build a skill the right way most people identify a workflow and immediately try to write the skill. what you want to do instead is run the workflow by hand with the agent first. walk it through every single step. tell it what to check, what good looks like, what bad looks like. correct it in real time. once you have had a full successful run from start to finish, tell the agent to review everything it just did and write the skill itself. it writes a better skill than you will because it has the full context of what actually worked in practice not in theory. 4. recursively building skills is how you go from frustrated to reliable when the skill breaks, and it will break, ask the agent exactly why it failed. it will tell you specifically what went wrong. fix it together in that same conversation. then tell it to update the skill file so that failure mode never happens again. ross mike did this five times with his youtube report generator. it now pulls from eight different data sources and runs flawlessly every single time without him touching it. 5. sub agents are something you earn not something you set up on day one start with one agent. build one workflow. turn it into one skill. once that works add another. ross mike has five sub agents now covering marketing, business, personal and more. it took months to get there and every single one exists because a workflow proved it deserved to exist. the people who set up 15 sub agents on day one and wonder why nothing works skipped all the steps that make the thing actually run. 6. your workflow is the thing the model cannot get anywhere else the model has been trained on everything. it knows more than you about most things. what it does not have is your specific process, your taste, your way of doing things. that is what skills capture. that is what makes your agent actually useful versus a generic one. downloading someone else's skill means downloading their context onto your setup and it will not work the way you want it to because it was never built around how you work. this is the clearest explanation of how agents actually work i have heard. Micky runs this stuff every single day and the results show it. full episode is now live on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 where you get your pods people charge for this sorta stuff i give away the sauce for free i just want you to win watch

GREG ISENBERG

194,524 views • 5 months ago

10 GitHub repos with ⭐ 1.2M+ combined stars that help you build your AI agent from scratch 1. n8n 201k⭐ - visual agent builder with 400+ integrations. Wire up multi-step AI workflows without writing a backend. 2. Hermes Agent 231k⭐ - the fastest-growing open-source agent framework of 2026. Self-improving skill loop, persistent memory across sessions. 3. Dify 152k⭐ - visual builder for agentic workflows and RAG pipelines, production-ready out of the box. 4. LangChain 144k⭐ - the standard framework for LLM apps. Chains, agents, retrieval, all in one place. 5. MetaGPT 70k⭐ - simulates an entire software company. PM, architect, engineer agents that build your app together. 6. AutoGen 60k⭐ - Microsoft's framework for multi-agent conversations and coordination. 7. OpenCode 198k⭐ - terminal coding agent, provider-agnostic across 75+ models. The go-to harness for agentic coding in 2026. 8. LlamaIndex 52k⭐ - connects your agents to your actual data. Indexing and retrieval done right. 9. CrewAI 57k⭐ - role-based crews of agents. Reads almost like plain English, no graph to learn. 10. LangGraph 40k⭐ - graph-based orchestration when you need precise control over agent state in production. Save this before you pay for another agent-building course 👇
1:08

10 GitHub repos with ⭐ 1.2M+ combined stars that help you build your AI agent from scratch 1. n8n 201k⭐ - visual agent builder with 400+ integrations. Wire up multi-step AI workflows without writing a backend. 2. Hermes Agent 231k⭐ - the fastest-growing open-source agent framework of 2026. Self-improving skill loop, persistent memory across sessions. 3. Dify 152k⭐ - visual builder for agentic workflows and RAG pipelines, production-ready out of the box. 4. LangChain 144k⭐ - the standard framework for LLM apps. Chains, agents, retrieval, all in one place. 5. MetaGPT 70k⭐ - simulates an entire software company. PM, architect, engineer agents that build your app together. 6. AutoGen 60k⭐ - Microsoft's framework for multi-agent conversations and coordination. 7. OpenCode 198k⭐ - terminal coding agent, provider-agnostic across 75+ models. The go-to harness for agentic coding in 2026. 8. LlamaIndex 52k⭐ - connects your agents to your actual data. Indexing and retrieval done right. 9. CrewAI 57k⭐ - role-based crews of agents. Reads almost like plain English, no graph to learn. 10. LangGraph 40k⭐ - graph-based orchestration when you need precise control over agent state in production. Save this before you pay for another agent-building course 👇

unicode

30,511 views • 1 month ago

the loop is not the whole agent it is only one layer of the system LOOP vs GRAPH vs HARNESS ENGINEERING LOOP ENGINEERING controls iteration turns retries budgets stop conditions success checks stalled progress use durable execution when the run must survive crashes → GRAPH ENGINEERING controls structure nodes edges state branches checkpoints routing handoffs build stateful agents as explicit graphs → inspect the topology without putting a model in the loop → HARNESS ENGINEERING controls exposure tools permissions memory sandboxes evals traces humans isolate generated code from the host machine → test behavior before users ever see it → preserve one trace across every model step and tool call → without loop control it keeps running without graph structure the path stays invisible without harness control it can reach anything the loop runs inside the graph the graph runs inside the harness the model is only one component debug the layer that actually owns the failure save this then read the article below
0:20

the loop is not the whole agent it is only one layer of the system LOOP vs GRAPH vs HARNESS ENGINEERING LOOP ENGINEERING controls iteration turns retries budgets stop conditions success checks stalled progress use durable execution when the run must survive crashes → GRAPH ENGINEERING controls structure nodes edges state branches checkpoints routing handoffs build stateful agents as explicit graphs → inspect the topology without putting a model in the loop → HARNESS ENGINEERING controls exposure tools permissions memory sandboxes evals traces humans isolate generated code from the host machine → test behavior before users ever see it → preserve one trace across every model step and tool call → without loop control it keeps running without graph structure the path stays invisible without harness control it can reach anything the loop runs inside the graph the graph runs inside the harness the model is only one component debug the layer that actually owns the failure save this then read the article below

rari

20,934 views • 2 months ago

your agent is not the loop the loop is only the smallest layer LOOP vs GRAPH vs HARNESS ENGINEERING most teams still treat all three like one prompt that is why agent failures feel impossible to diagnose LOOP ENGINEERING controls iteration turns retries budgets evaluators exits stalled progress when the run keeps going forever the loop is broken make long-running work survive crashes and restarts → GRAPH ENGINEERING controls structure nodes edges state branches cycles joins checkpoints when the agent takes the wrong path the graph is broken make state and routing explicit → inspect the topology without asking another model to explain it → HARNESS ENGINEERING controls access tools permissions memory sandboxes evals traces humans when the agent touches the wrong system the harness is broken isolate generated code and tool execution from the host → put an eval gate before every model or prompt update → keep one trace across every node model and tool call → without loop engineering it never stops without graph engineering you cannot see the path without harness engineering it can reach anything the prompt lives inside the loop the loop lives inside the graph the graph lives inside the harness the model is the smallest box in the system debug the layer that actually owns the failure save this before the next agent rewrite
0:20

your agent is not the loop the loop is only the smallest layer LOOP vs GRAPH vs HARNESS ENGINEERING most teams still treat all three like one prompt that is why agent failures feel impossible to diagnose LOOP ENGINEERING controls iteration turns retries budgets evaluators exits stalled progress when the run keeps going forever the loop is broken make long-running work survive crashes and restarts → GRAPH ENGINEERING controls structure nodes edges state branches cycles joins checkpoints when the agent takes the wrong path the graph is broken make state and routing explicit → inspect the topology without asking another model to explain it → HARNESS ENGINEERING controls access tools permissions memory sandboxes evals traces humans when the agent touches the wrong system the harness is broken isolate generated code and tool execution from the host → put an eval gate before every model or prompt update → keep one trace across every node model and tool call → without loop engineering it never stops without graph engineering you cannot see the path without harness engineering it can reach anything the prompt lives inside the loop the loop lives inside the graph the graph lives inside the harness the model is the smallest box in the system debug the layer that actually owns the failure save this before the next agent rewrite

elune

16,875 views • 2 months ago

Our latest LangChain Academy course – Building Ambient Agents with LangGraph – is now available! Most agents today handle one request at a time through chat interfaces. But as models have improved, agents can now run in the background – and take on long-running, complex tasks. LangGraph is built for these “ambient agents,” with support for human-in-the-loop workflows and memory. LangGraph Platform provides the infrastructure to run these agents at scale, and LangSmith helps you observe, evaluate, and improve your agents. Together, they make it easier to build reliable, production-ready agents. In this course, you’ll: 📩 Learn the fundamentals of LangGraph and how to build your own email agent 📊 Evaluate your agent using LangSmith ✅ Add human-in-the-loop for reviews, and memory so your agent adapts over time 🚀 Deploy your agent with LangGraph Platform and connect it to Gmail
3:02

Our latest LangChain Academy course – Building Ambient Agents with LangGraph – is now available! Most agents today handle one request at a time through chat interfaces. But as models have improved, agents can now run in the background – and take on long-running, complex tasks. LangGraph is built for these “ambient agents,” with support for human-in-the-loop workflows and memory. LangGraph Platform provides the infrastructure to run these agents at scale, and LangSmith helps you observe, evaluate, and improve your agents. Together, they make it easier to build reliable, production-ready agents. In this course, you’ll: 📩 Learn the fundamentals of LangGraph and how to build your own email agent 📊 Evaluate your agent using LangSmith ✅ Add human-in-the-loop for reviews, and memory so your agent adapts over time 🚀 Deploy your agent with LangGraph Platform and connect it to Gmail

LangChain

33,192 views • 1 year ago

LOOP + GRAPH + CONTEXT ENGINEERING = THE KIMI K3 STACK THAT KEEPS RUNNING 300 Kimi K3 agents built one graph out of 100 companies. no 300 documents to read yourself kimi-swarm/ ├── swarm_launch.md task, sources, stop condition ├── CONSTRAINTS.md corrections from every past run ├── graph/ 384 entities, 1,064 typed edges, 8 closed verbs └── cron/ re-fires the swarm on schedule > one node sits at the center with 12 inbound edges - the vendor everyone depends on and nobody flagged in the prompt > 2 hops already answers most of what you'd actually ask it loop decides when it fires -> graph decides what's kept -> context decides what survives after the session closes how people are getting paid on this: > one build sold as a competitive teardown - replaces a four-figure analyst contract, done in an hour, unattended > the same graph on retainer - charge weekly for every new edge that shows up > wire the stack for someone else's market once it's proven on your own full version of this tree is in the article below
0:22

LOOP + GRAPH + CONTEXT ENGINEERING = THE KIMI K3 STACK THAT KEEPS RUNNING 300 Kimi K3 agents built one graph out of 100 companies. no 300 documents to read yourself kimi-swarm/ ├── swarm_launch.md task, sources, stop condition ├── CONSTRAINTS.md corrections from every past run ├── graph/ 384 entities, 1,064 typed edges, 8 closed verbs └── cron/ re-fires the swarm on schedule > one node sits at the center with 12 inbound edges - the vendor everyone depends on and nobody flagged in the prompt > 2 hops already answers most of what you'd actually ask it loop decides when it fires -> graph decides what's kept -> context decides what survives after the session closes how people are getting paid on this: > one build sold as a competitive teardown - replaces a four-figure analyst contract, done in an hour, unattended > the same graph on retainer - charge weekly for every new edge that shows up > wire the stack for someone else's market once it's proven on your own full version of this tree is in the article below

Mr. Buzzoni

15,462 views • 1 month ago

FIVE LAYERS OF AGENT ENGINEERING, EACH ONE WRAPS THE ONE BELOW IT. IF YOU SKIP LAYER 2, YOUR LAYER 5 WILL LOOK BROKEN WHEN IT IS ACTUALLY JUST STANDING ON NOTHING. for weeks i debated harness vs loop vs graph like they were competing choices. then a stack diagram made the shape obvious. they are not choices. they are floors. 01 | prompt engineering. the message. unit of work: one input. inputs are role, instructions, examples, format. output is a single raw response. 02 | context engineering. the memory. unit of work: what stays in the window. a curator selects, compresses, and drops from query, docs, memory, prior turns, and tool outputs before the prompt runs. 03 | harness engineering. the machine. unit of work: the machine itself. gather (context + prompt) → LLM → tools or sub-agents → verifier → final response. the article calls this the operating environment. 04 | loop engineering. the system. unit of work: the run. goal + success criteria + max iterations + budget + completion check wrap around one harness pass. failed pass appends results to context and retries. 05 | graph engineering. the topology. unit of work: the graph run. goal + nodes + edges + state schema. graph routes to agent nodes, tool nodes, or human approval. a reviewer node with a different model and fresh context checks the final answer. the wrapping is the whole point. layer 5 assumes layer 4 works. layer 4 assumes layer 3 works. skip layer 2 and layer 3's verifier keeps failing without a clear reason. this is why swapping the model is a one-day project and swapping the stack is a quarter. the model is the commodity. the five layers around it are the engineering. full three-layer breakdown of the top of the stack (harness, loop, graph) in the post below.
0:20

FIVE LAYERS OF AGENT ENGINEERING, EACH ONE WRAPS THE ONE BELOW IT. IF YOU SKIP LAYER 2, YOUR LAYER 5 WILL LOOK BROKEN WHEN IT IS ACTUALLY JUST STANDING ON NOTHING. for weeks i debated harness vs loop vs graph like they were competing choices. then a stack diagram made the shape obvious. they are not choices. they are floors. 01 | prompt engineering. the message. unit of work: one input. inputs are role, instructions, examples, format. output is a single raw response. 02 | context engineering. the memory. unit of work: what stays in the window. a curator selects, compresses, and drops from query, docs, memory, prior turns, and tool outputs before the prompt runs. 03 | harness engineering. the machine. unit of work: the machine itself. gather (context + prompt) → LLM → tools or sub-agents → verifier → final response. the article calls this the operating environment. 04 | loop engineering. the system. unit of work: the run. goal + success criteria + max iterations + budget + completion check wrap around one harness pass. failed pass appends results to context and retries. 05 | graph engineering. the topology. unit of work: the graph run. goal + nodes + edges + state schema. graph routes to agent nodes, tool nodes, or human approval. a reviewer node with a different model and fresh context checks the final answer. the wrapping is the whole point. layer 5 assumes layer 4 works. layer 4 assumes layer 3 works. skip layer 2 and layer 3's verifier keeps failing without a clear reason. this is why swapping the model is a one-day project and swapping the stack is a quarter. the model is the commodity. the five layers around it are the engineering. full three-layer breakdown of the top of the stack (harness, loop, graph) in the post below.

kocer

31,198 views • 1 month ago

Orchestrators vs. Graphs, clearly explained! orchestrators are great, and everyone builds one first. here is the ceiling: an orchestrator sits above the work and routes every message. five agents report to it. it reads all five. it decides what each one does next, and reads all five replies. that is ten trips through one context, and by the fifth agent that context has read four reports, five instructions and its own reasoning about all of them. Graph engineering fixes this by removing the seat: not a better router, but no router at all. you need both, and here is the sentence that resolves the whole confusion: an orchestrator sits above the work and holds all of it. a graph is the shape of the work, and holds none of it. ↳ above the work: one context that has to see everything before anything ships ↳ inside the work: a splitter that hands out and lets go, and a merge that reads nothing Prompts → Context → Harness → Loops → Graphs the coordination did not disappear. it moved into the edges, where it costs nothing and cannot get tired. the trick is noticing what you actually built. if one node has to see every result before the run can finish, you did not remove the bottleneck. you hired it, gave it the longest context in the system, and made it the thing you were counting on to stay sharp. one thing to know before you scale it. an orchestrator degrades in the one way nothing catches. ↳ it does not crash, time out or return an error. it stays up and keeps routing ↳ it just starts routing worse, somewhere around the fifth report, and every downstream agent does exactly what it was told that last one catches careful people. you can have perfect isolation on every worker and still have one window quietly drifting at the top, and the traces will all look clean because each worker did its job. and the one that eats whole nights: the merge is where this shows up first. ranking five findings is not judgment, it is a sort. if a model is doing it, you are paying a model to read five reports so it can put them in an order that three lines of code would have got right, and now that model has read everything too. below i have quoted my full guide on graph engineering. it covers the three topologies, the verifier patterns, and where the gate should actually open. save this and read it below ↓
0:47

Orchestrators vs. Graphs, clearly explained! orchestrators are great, and everyone builds one first. here is the ceiling: an orchestrator sits above the work and routes every message. five agents report to it. it reads all five. it decides what each one does next, and reads all five replies. that is ten trips through one context, and by the fifth agent that context has read four reports, five instructions and its own reasoning about all of them. Graph engineering fixes this by removing the seat: not a better router, but no router at all. you need both, and here is the sentence that resolves the whole confusion: an orchestrator sits above the work and holds all of it. a graph is the shape of the work, and holds none of it. ↳ above the work: one context that has to see everything before anything ships ↳ inside the work: a splitter that hands out and lets go, and a merge that reads nothing Prompts → Context → Harness → Loops → Graphs the coordination did not disappear. it moved into the edges, where it costs nothing and cannot get tired. the trick is noticing what you actually built. if one node has to see every result before the run can finish, you did not remove the bottleneck. you hired it, gave it the longest context in the system, and made it the thing you were counting on to stay sharp. one thing to know before you scale it. an orchestrator degrades in the one way nothing catches. ↳ it does not crash, time out or return an error. it stays up and keeps routing ↳ it just starts routing worse, somewhere around the fifth report, and every downstream agent does exactly what it was told that last one catches careful people. you can have perfect isolation on every worker and still have one window quietly drifting at the top, and the traces will all look clean because each worker did its job. and the one that eats whole nights: the merge is where this shows up first. ranking five findings is not judgment, it is a sort. if a model is doing it, you are paying a model to read five reports so it can put them in an order that three lines of code would have got right, and now that model has read everything too. below i have quoted my full guide on graph engineering. it covers the three topologies, the verifier patterns, and where the gate should actually open. save this and read it below ↓

Hanako

44,226 views • 19 days ago

Andrew Ng just released a free 2-hour course on complete Graph Engineering How to go from one prompt to 100 agents that loop, improve, and run without you: 09:14 - Build your first AI agent 33:11 - Run agents with loop engineering 1:02:46 - Turn agent loops into graphs 1:30:15 - Build agents that rewrite themselves 1:49:05 - Run the full graph system without you Most people are still building one agent and calling it finished Andrew Ng is already teaching everything that comes next: Prompt → Agents → Loops → Graphs → Self-Improving Systems Single agents are the old workflow Systems that improve and run without you are the next one This 2-hour course is worth more than most $500 agent engineering programs Bookmark it and watch before everyone catches up Then read how to run 1,000 agents from one prompt below ↓
1:51:29

Andrew Ng just released a free 2-hour course on complete Graph Engineering How to go from one prompt to 100 agents that loop, improve, and run without you: 09:14 - Build your first AI agent 33:11 - Run agents with loop engineering 1:02:46 - Turn agent loops into graphs 1:30:15 - Build agents that rewrite themselves 1:49:05 - Run the full graph system without you Most people are still building one agent and calling it finished Andrew Ng is already teaching everything that comes next: Prompt → Agents → Loops → Graphs → Self-Improving Systems Single agents are the old workflow Systems that improve and run without you are the next one This 2-hour course is worth more than most $500 agent engineering programs Bookmark it and watch before everyone catches up Then read how to run 1,000 agents from one prompt below ↓

reira

14,729 views • 1 month ago

Google just released a free 2-hour course on full Graph Engineering. How to go from one prompt to 100 agents running inside one graph: 17:44 - Build your first AI agent 39:30 - Run agents with loop engineering 1:12:38 - Turn agent loops into graphs 1:34:26 - Build agents that throttle themselves 1:55:05 - Orchestrate the full multi-agent system Most people build one agent and stop there. Google is teaching the full stack: Prompt → Agents → Loops → Graphs → Multi-Agent Systems Single agents are the old workflow. Self-regulating agent graphs are the new one. This 2-hour watch is worth more than most paid agent engineering courses. Bookmark and watch it today Then read the full architecture below ↓
2:05:53

Google just released a free 2-hour course on full Graph Engineering. How to go from one prompt to 100 agents running inside one graph: 17:44 - Build your first AI agent 39:30 - Run agents with loop engineering 1:12:38 - Turn agent loops into graphs 1:34:26 - Build agents that throttle themselves 1:55:05 - Orchestrate the full multi-agent system Most people build one agent and stop there. Google is teaching the full stack: Prompt → Agents → Loops → Graphs → Multi-Agent Systems Single agents are the old workflow. Self-regulating agent graphs are the new one. This 2-hour watch is worth more than most paid agent engineering courses. Bookmark and watch it today Then read the full architecture below ↓

Lunar

403,447 views • 1 month ago

Andrew Ng just released a 2-hour course on full Graph Engineering. How to go from one prompt to 100 agents that loop, rewrite themselves, and run without you: 09:14 - Build your first AI agent 33:11 - Run agents with loop engineering 1:02:46 - Turn agent loops into graphs 1:30:15 - Build agents that rewrite themselves 1:49:05 - Run the full graph system without you Most people are still building one agent and calling it done. Andrew Ng is already teaching everything after: Prompt → Agents → Loops → Graphs → Self-Improving Systems Single agents are the old workflow. Systems that improve and run without you are the new one. This 2-hour watch is worth more than most $500 agent engineering courses. Bookmark and watch it before everyone catches up. Then read how to run 1,000 agents from one prompt below ↓
1:48:23

Andrew Ng just released a 2-hour course on full Graph Engineering. How to go from one prompt to 100 agents that loop, rewrite themselves, and run without you: 09:14 - Build your first AI agent 33:11 - Run agents with loop engineering 1:02:46 - Turn agent loops into graphs 1:30:15 - Build agents that rewrite themselves 1:49:05 - Run the full graph system without you Most people are still building one agent and calling it done. Andrew Ng is already teaching everything after: Prompt → Agents → Loops → Graphs → Self-Improving Systems Single agents are the old workflow. Systems that improve and run without you are the new one. This 2-hour watch is worth more than most $500 agent engineering courses. Bookmark and watch it before everyone catches up. Then read how to run 1,000 agents from one prompt below ↓

Lunar

226,799 views • 1 month ago

context engineering vs graph engineering. every few months the list gets a new word and everyone treats it as a replacement for the last one. these two are not on the same list. one decides what the model sees this turn, the other decides what exists at all. the cleanest way to tell them apart is to ask what a single unit of work looks like. > context engineering is the window the window opens empty, every single time. you assemble what goes in it. the prompt, the docs, the history, the tool results. the assembling is the work. the window only grows. it never shrinks on its own, so eventually something gets dropped. usually from the middle. usually without telling you. then the turn ends and the window is thrown away. not archived, thrown away. the next turn opens empty again and you re-explain what you already explained. good context engineering is knowing what to leave out, not what to pack in. the unit of work is one window. > graph engineering is the structure the same material arrives from the same sources. instead of packing it into a window, you pull entities out of it, resolve the duplicates into one node, and write typed edges between them. nothing here is stored as text you hope to find again. it is stored as a thing with a name and its connections to other things. when the turn ends, the graph is still there. the next turn does not start from zero. it starts by querying what already exists, and the query walks edges instead of guessing at similarity. good graph engineering is deciding what counts as the same thing twice. the unit of work is one relationship. > they are not alternatives the graph is what refills the window. context engineering decides what fits. graph engineering decides what there is to choose from. remove the graph and every session starts blind. remove the context work and the best structure in the world arrives as an unreadable dump. that also tells you which one broke. the answer drifted from what you actually said, or forgot something from this same session. that is the window. the answer is coherent but invents a connection that does not exist, or cannot join two facts it has clearly seen. that is the structure. people debug the prompt because the prompt is the easiest thing to edit. it keeps taking the blame for failures that live a layer down. save this - then read the full breakdown below
0:40

context engineering vs graph engineering. every few months the list gets a new word and everyone treats it as a replacement for the last one. these two are not on the same list. one decides what the model sees this turn, the other decides what exists at all. the cleanest way to tell them apart is to ask what a single unit of work looks like. > context engineering is the window the window opens empty, every single time. you assemble what goes in it. the prompt, the docs, the history, the tool results. the assembling is the work. the window only grows. it never shrinks on its own, so eventually something gets dropped. usually from the middle. usually without telling you. then the turn ends and the window is thrown away. not archived, thrown away. the next turn opens empty again and you re-explain what you already explained. good context engineering is knowing what to leave out, not what to pack in. the unit of work is one window. > graph engineering is the structure the same material arrives from the same sources. instead of packing it into a window, you pull entities out of it, resolve the duplicates into one node, and write typed edges between them. nothing here is stored as text you hope to find again. it is stored as a thing with a name and its connections to other things. when the turn ends, the graph is still there. the next turn does not start from zero. it starts by querying what already exists, and the query walks edges instead of guessing at similarity. good graph engineering is deciding what counts as the same thing twice. the unit of work is one relationship. > they are not alternatives the graph is what refills the window. context engineering decides what fits. graph engineering decides what there is to choose from. remove the graph and every session starts blind. remove the context work and the best structure in the world arrives as an unreadable dump. that also tells you which one broke. the answer drifted from what you actually said, or forgot something from this same session. that is the window. the answer is coherent but invents a connection that does not exist, or cannot join two facts it has clearly seen. that is the structure. people debug the prompt because the prompt is the easiest thing to edit. it keeps taking the blame for failures that live a layer down. save this - then read the full breakdown below

Hanako

19,160 views • 2 months ago

I’ve been waiting for something like this. Using multiple AI agents sounds great until you have to keep giving each one the same context. Jarvix Jarvix is built to solve that： It carries your selected context across the AI tools you already use and brings everything together in one place. #JarvixOS You can use Jarvix Home to see your context and connections, Jarvix Search to find past information without remembering exact file names, and Self Reflection to spot patterns in the way you work. There’s also Jarvix Radio for personalized content discovery and Next Move to surface a useful direction based on your context. And the part I find most interesting: Agent Team Mode. Give Jarvix one goal, choose the agents you want to use, and it divides the work while keeping everyone on the same project context. You can watch the progress, review the result, and approve what happens next. No need to keep briefing every agent from scratch. One goal. Shared context. Multiple agents. You stay in control. That’s a much cleaner way to work with AI.
0:59

I’ve been waiting for something like this. Using multiple AI agents sounds great until you have to keep giving each one the same context. Jarvix Jarvix is built to solve that： It carries your selected context across the AI tools you already use and brings everything together in one place. #JarvixOS You can use Jarvix Home to see your context and connections, Jarvix Search to find past information without remembering exact file names, and Self Reflection to spot patterns in the way you work. There’s also Jarvix Radio for personalized content discovery and Next Move to surface a useful direction based on your context. And the part I find most interesting: Agent Team Mode. Give Jarvix one goal, choose the agents you want to use, and it divides the work while keeping everyone on the same project context. You can watch the progress, review the result, and approve what happens next. No need to keep briefing every agent from scratch. One goal. Shared context. Multiple agents. You stay in control. That’s a much cleaner way to work with AI.

Aaliya

23,225 views • 1 month ago

Google just released a free 2-hour course on full Graph Engineering. How to go from one prompt to 100 agents running inside a single graph: 0% → 17:44 - build your first AI agent 25% → 39:30 - run agents with loop engineering 50% → 1:12:38 - turn agent loops into graphs 75% → 1:34:26 - build agents that regulate themselves 100% → 1:55:05 - orchestrate the entire multi-agent system Most people build one agent and stop there. Google is teaching the entire stack: Prompt → Agents → Loops → Graphs → Multi-Agent Systems Single agents are the old workflow. Self-regulating agent graphs are the next one. This 2-hour course is worth more than most paid agent engineering courses. Bookmark it and watch today Then read the full architecture below ↓
2:04:23

Google just released a free 2-hour course on full Graph Engineering. How to go from one prompt to 100 agents running inside a single graph: 0% → 17:44 - build your first AI agent 25% → 39:30 - run agents with loop engineering 50% → 1:12:38 - turn agent loops into graphs 75% → 1:34:26 - build agents that regulate themselves 100% → 1:55:05 - orchestrate the entire multi-agent system Most people build one agent and stop there. Google is teaching the entire stack: Prompt → Agents → Loops → Graphs → Multi-Agent Systems Single agents are the old workflow. Self-regulating agent graphs are the next one. This 2-hour course is worth more than most paid agent engineering courses. Bookmark it and watch today Then read the full architecture below ↓

Lunar

12,020 views • 1 month ago