正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Jev Engineering is what turns a messy agent graph into a controlled decision loop. and up to 193x faster and 444x cheaper in tests. the video looks complex, but the idea is simple: Jev Engineering makes that decision explicit. state enters → routes get scored → confidence updates →...

0xRicker's profile picture

Ricker

10,629 subscribers

19,376 次观看 • 5 天前 •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

12 条评论

Smarty 的头像
Smarty5 天前

wow mate

rewind 的头像
rewind5 天前

Clean visual, bro

Dain 的头像
Dain5 天前

knowing when to stop a branch is just as important as knowing which one to run.

Apex 的头像
Apex5 天前

Banger mate, really enjoy your article

Ricker 的头像
Ricker5 天前

glad that you find it useful

Selfy 的头像
Selfy5 天前

start reading full article

Jurly 的头像
Jurly5 天前

explicit confidence gates are much easier to debug than a swarm of implicit agent choices.

Sophia l 的头像
Sophia l5 天前

how do you handle confidence decay over time

Brjan | AI Builder 的头像
Brjan | AI Builder5 天前

turning a messy agent graph into a decision loop could save teams tons of time

magsimich 的头像
magsimich5 天前

Making decisions explicit helps a lot

Morty 的头像
Morty5 天前

What a visual mate, perfectly

Lee_1909 的头像
Lee_19095 天前

This is a really interesting take on agent decision-making.

相关视频

Jev Engineering is what lets one decision layer control hundreds of agent paths without turning the system into chaos. and up to 193x faster and 444x cheaper in tests. it’s deciding: → which model gets called → which tool gets access → which result survives that’s what the video is showing. one state enters. Jev turns it into structured decisions. those decisions fan out across dozens of routes, agents and tools. then everything collapses back into one verified state. so instead of: LLM → agent → tool → another LLM → another guess you get: state → Jev decision layer → parallel routes → execution → verification → next state that’s the point of Jev Engineering: more parallelism without giving every branch permission to improvise. full breakdown in the article below ↓
0:34

Jev Engineering is what lets one decision layer control hundreds of agent paths without turning the system into chaos. and up to 193x faster and 444x cheaper in tests. it’s deciding: → which model gets called → which tool gets access → which result survives that’s what the video is showing. one state enters. Jev turns it into structured decisions. those decisions fan out across dozens of routes, agents and tools. then everything collapses back into one verified state. so instead of: LLM → agent → tool → another LLM → another guess you get: state → Jev decision layer → parallel routes → execution → verification → next state that’s the point of Jev Engineering: more parallelism without giving every branch permission to improvise. full breakdown in the article below ↓

Ricker

44,743 次观看 • 6 天前

Jev Engineering is what turns an agent stack into an actual control system and moves the expensive model out of every decision loop. and up to 193x faster and 444x cheaper in tests. the model shouldn’t decide everything. in this setup: request → structured state → Jev router → cheapest capable model → worker → relevance / approval checks → execution gate → tool the important part is that the decision layers don’t generate prose. they route → score → block → approve. so expensive models only get called when the task actually needs them. that’s the point of Jev Engineering: separate reasoning from decision-making, then make the decision layer measurable, cheap and fast. full breakdown in the article below ↓
0:39

Jev Engineering is what turns an agent stack into an actual control system and moves the expensive model out of every decision loop. and up to 193x faster and 444x cheaper in tests. the model shouldn’t decide everything. in this setup: request → structured state → Jev router → cheapest capable model → worker → relevance / approval checks → execution gate → tool the important part is that the decision layers don’t generate prose. they route → score → block → approve. so expensive models only get called when the task actually needs them. that’s the point of Jev Engineering: separate reasoning from decision-making, then make the decision layer measurable, cheap and fast. full breakdown in the article below ↓

Ricker

178,794 次观看 • 7 天前

Jev Engineering is the layer most agent stacks are still missing. state → decision → action → verification → next state up to 193x faster and 444x cheaper in our tests. everyone is optimizing the model. Jev Engineering optimizes what happens between model calls. every agent eventually hits the same fork: state → multiple possible actions → one route has to win instead of sending every decision back to an expensive LLM call, Jev turns that into a dedicated layer: so the loop becomes: LLM → reason Jev → decide tools / agents → execute state → update Jev → decide again once decisions become their own engineering layer, you can benchmark, batch and verify them separately. full blueprint in article ↓
0:29

Jev Engineering is the layer most agent stacks are still missing. state → decision → action → verification → next state up to 193x faster and 444x cheaper in our tests. everyone is optimizing the model. Jev Engineering optimizes what happens between model calls. every agent eventually hits the same fork: state → multiple possible actions → one route has to win instead of sending every decision back to an expensive LLM call, Jev turns that into a dedicated layer: so the loop becomes: LLM → reason Jev → decide tools / agents → execute state → update Jev → decide again once decisions become their own engineering layer, you can benchmark, batch and verify them separately. full blueprint in article ↓

Ricker

116,701 次观看 • 8 天前

Jev Engineering turns a static agent workflow into a graph that can rewrite itself while running. the video is basically the problem at scale: hundreds of routes → thousands of crossings → different agents → different tools → different confidence levels Jev Engineering doesn’t control every step. it controls the crossings. when two paths compete: → score both → kill the weak route → reroute the task so instead of one fixed chain, you get a live braid: state → decision → parallel paths → crossings → Jev → next state that’s the point of Jev Engineering: more parallel execution without letting the system lose the objective. the agents create the paths. Jev decides which paths survive. full breakdown below ↓
0:41

Jev Engineering turns a static agent workflow into a graph that can rewrite itself while running. the video is basically the problem at scale: hundreds of routes → thousands of crossings → different agents → different tools → different confidence levels Jev Engineering doesn’t control every step. it controls the crossings. when two paths compete: → score both → kill the weak route → reroute the task so instead of one fixed chain, you get a live braid: state → decision → parallel paths → crossings → Jev → next state that’s the point of Jev Engineering: more parallel execution without letting the system lose the objective. the agents create the paths. Jev decides which paths survive. full breakdown below ↓

Ricker

11,145 次观看 • 3 天前

Jev Engineering changes the unit of optimization from “agent” to “decision.” that sounds small, but it changes the architecture. and up to 193x faster and 444x cheaper in tests. normal multi-agent stack: agent → prompt → tool → output Jev-style stack: shared state → decision boundary → selected branch → execution → measurement → state update now you can optimize the actual control points: latency per decision cost per fork confidence threshold retry policy branch survival termination condition the agents underneath can change. the models can change. the tools can change. the decision layer stays measurable. that’s why Jev Engineering feels more like systems engineering than prompt engineering.
0:39

Jev Engineering changes the unit of optimization from “agent” to “decision.” that sounds small, but it changes the architecture. and up to 193x faster and 444x cheaper in tests. normal multi-agent stack: agent → prompt → tool → output Jev-style stack: shared state → decision boundary → selected branch → execution → measurement → state update now you can optimize the actual control points: latency per decision cost per fork confidence threshold retry policy branch survival termination condition the agents underneath can change. the models can change. the tools can change. the decision layer stays measurable. that’s why Jev Engineering feels more like systems engineering than prompt engineering.

Ricker

21,662 次观看 • 2 天前

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 次观看 • 1 个月前

Anthropic engineer: "At Anthropic, all of our engineers are running hundreds of agents The way you do it is graph engineering" In just 36 minutes, he shows how Anthropic runs hundreds of agents at once and what actually makes it possible Prompts → Agents → Loops → Graphs The part most people skip is the return path, where every accepted result becomes a constraint for the next run Same model, same tokens, completely different system Prompting is the old workflow Graph engineering is the next one Watch it today Then save the full graph engineering guide below before everyone starts catching up ↓
35:57

Anthropic engineer: "At Anthropic, all of our engineers are running hundreds of agents The way you do it is graph engineering" In just 36 minutes, he shows how Anthropic runs hundreds of agents at once and what actually makes it possible Prompts → Agents → Loops → Graphs The part most people skip is the return path, where every accepted result becomes a constraint for the next run Same model, same tokens, completely different system Prompting is the old workflow Graph engineering is the next one Watch it today Then save the full graph engineering guide below before everyone starts catching up ↓

Lunar

32,634 次观看 • 18 天前

jev + opus 5.5 is one of those setups that makes agent architecture feel weirdly overcomplicated in hindsight. the useful split isn’t “small model vs big model.” it’s deciding which calls actually need generation at all. → jev routes the next worker → scores which context is worth keeping → catches repeated actions before they burn the run → gates risky tool calls and sends uncertainty to review opus still owns the expensive part: planning, writing, coding, synthesis. jev sits around it as the decision layer. that matters because a typical loop can have 11 decision points but only 2 real generation calls. once those are separated, latency and cost stop scaling with every tiny fork in the workflow.
0:24

jev + opus 5.5 is one of those setups that makes agent architecture feel weirdly overcomplicated in hindsight. the useful split isn’t “small model vs big model.” it’s deciding which calls actually need generation at all. → jev routes the next worker → scores which context is worth keeping → catches repeated actions before they burn the run → gates risky tool calls and sends uncertainty to review opus still owns the expensive part: planning, writing, coding, synthesis. jev sits around it as the decision layer. that matters because a typical loop can have 11 decision points but only 2 real generation calls. once those are separated, latency and cost stop scaling with every tiny fork in the workflow.

Gipp 🦅

49,670 次观看 • 1 天前

Ok this is actually insane. Everyone building agents right now is doing the same expensive mistake. They let the model decide LITERALLY everything. Every check. Every gate. Every "should this proceed." All routed through the same $50/M model that's supposed to be doing the hard thinking. That's not intelligence. That's just burning money to ask yes or no questions. Here's what Jev Engineering actually does: request → structured state → Jev router → cheapest capable model → worker → approval check → execution gate → tool The decision layer doesn't write a single word. It routes. Scores. Blocks. Approves. That's it. The expensive model only gets touched when the task LITERALLY requires reasoning. Everything else gets handled by something that costs almost nothing and responds in milliseconds. 193x faster. 444x cheaper. Not projected. Measured. Most people are going to keep paying frontier prices to ask their agent "yes or no" for another year before they figure this out. Full breakdown below, this is the unlock nobody's talking about yet. Follow CyrilXBT, I'm not gatekeeping this one.
0:40

Ok this is actually insane. Everyone building agents right now is doing the same expensive mistake. They let the model decide LITERALLY everything. Every check. Every gate. Every "should this proceed." All routed through the same $50/M model that's supposed to be doing the hard thinking. That's not intelligence. That's just burning money to ask yes or no questions. Here's what Jev Engineering actually does: request → structured state → Jev router → cheapest capable model → worker → approval check → execution gate → tool The decision layer doesn't write a single word. It routes. Scores. Blocks. Approves. That's it. The expensive model only gets touched when the task LITERALLY requires reasoning. Everything else gets handled by something that costs almost nothing and responds in milliseconds. 193x faster. 444x cheaper. Not projected. Measured. Most people are going to keep paying frontier prices to ask their agent "yes or no" for another year before they figure this out. Full breakdown below, this is the unlock nobody's talking about yet. Follow CyrilXBT, I'm not gatekeeping this one.

CyrilXBT

21,816 次观看 • 7 天前

Everyone is talking about JEV. Almost nobody knows how to actually use it. These 10 GitHub repos fix that. 1. browser-use/jev-ultrafast (~16.6k⭐) Jev for browser agents: pick the next action without another expensive LLM call. 2. tamaratran/fast-jev-compaction (~6.5k⭐) Uses Jev to decide what context still matters and what can be dropped. 3. TheoLeeCJ/SemIf (~4k⭐) Open-source Jev-style decision making you can run locally. 4. jarrodwatts/jev-trader (~2.1k⭐) Real-time trading loop where Jev decides buy, sell or wait. 5. kerpopule/hermes-jev-skills (~670⭐) Jev routing, memory, compaction and skill selection for AI agents. 6. devagrawal09/jev-review (~570⭐) Code review powered by Jev decisions instead of one giant prompt. 7. thruwire/foreman (~520⭐) Jev as a supervisor for coding agents: continue, retry, verify or stop. 8. superagents-lab/jev-search (~400⭐) Jev decides where and how an agent should search. 9. droidrun/mobile-jev (~350⭐) Jev for Android agents choosing the next app action. 10. gargpratyush/jev-router (~340⭐) Routes agent tasks to the right model with Jev. After looking through these, the pattern is pretty clear: LLMs generate. Agents execute. JEV decides. That decision layer is what most agent stacks are still missing. Save this if you want to integrate Jev into your workflow👇
1:11

Everyone is talking about JEV. Almost nobody knows how to actually use it. These 10 GitHub repos fix that. 1. browser-use/jev-ultrafast (~16.6k⭐) Jev for browser agents: pick the next action without another expensive LLM call. 2. tamaratran/fast-jev-compaction (~6.5k⭐) Uses Jev to decide what context still matters and what can be dropped. 3. TheoLeeCJ/SemIf (~4k⭐) Open-source Jev-style decision making you can run locally. 4. jarrodwatts/jev-trader (~2.1k⭐) Real-time trading loop where Jev decides buy, sell or wait. 5. kerpopule/hermes-jev-skills (~670⭐) Jev routing, memory, compaction and skill selection for AI agents. 6. devagrawal09/jev-review (~570⭐) Code review powered by Jev decisions instead of one giant prompt. 7. thruwire/foreman (~520⭐) Jev as a supervisor for coding agents: continue, retry, verify or stop. 8. superagents-lab/jev-search (~400⭐) Jev decides where and how an agent should search. 9. droidrun/mobile-jev (~350⭐) Jev for Android agents choosing the next app action. 10. gargpratyush/jev-router (~340⭐) Routes agent tasks to the right model with Jev. After looking through these, the pattern is pretty clear: LLMs generate. Agents execute. JEV decides. That decision layer is what most agent stacks are still missing. Save this if you want to integrate Jev into your workflow👇

unicode

20,745 次观看 • 4 天前

Google's team published a 9-page PDF on Harness Engineering. one formula replaced prompt engineering: Agent = Model + Harness the twist: same Claude Sonnet, same benchmark. change only the harness the playbook, six steps: step 1 -> add guides AGENTS.md, rule files, constraint docs. every line is a past agent failure turned into a permanent fix step 2 -> add sensors linters, tests, validation scripts the agent runs on its own output before a human sees it step 3 -> build the agentic loop plan, execute, verify, fix. bounded retries, budget caps, escalation when stuck step 4 -> externalize memory the model forgets every session. the harness holds state, decisions and artifacts across all of them step 5 -> enforce permissions which tools, how many writes, what needs approval. safety lives in the harness, never in the model step 6 -> wire observability track every tool call, cost and retry. trip wires fire when behavior drifts the result: your agent turns from a demo into infrastructure every failure makes the system permanently better, not just the next conversation that's also the line between an agent you show people and one a client pays you to leave running one harness gets you a reliable loop. connect several and it becomes graph engineering, where one agent's failure turns into another agent's sensor the PDF stops at the harness. the graph is the next layer that breakdown, running on Kimi, is below ↓
0:24

Google's team published a 9-page PDF on Harness Engineering. one formula replaced prompt engineering: Agent = Model + Harness the twist: same Claude Sonnet, same benchmark. change only the harness the playbook, six steps: step 1 -> add guides AGENTS.md, rule files, constraint docs. every line is a past agent failure turned into a permanent fix step 2 -> add sensors linters, tests, validation scripts the agent runs on its own output before a human sees it step 3 -> build the agentic loop plan, execute, verify, fix. bounded retries, budget caps, escalation when stuck step 4 -> externalize memory the model forgets every session. the harness holds state, decisions and artifacts across all of them step 5 -> enforce permissions which tools, how many writes, what needs approval. safety lives in the harness, never in the model step 6 -> wire observability track every tool call, cost and retry. trip wires fire when behavior drifts the result: your agent turns from a demo into infrastructure every failure makes the system permanently better, not just the next conversation that's also the line between an agent you show people and one a client pays you to leave running one harness gets you a reliable loop. connect several and it becomes graph engineering, where one agent's failure turns into another agent's sensor the PDF stops at the harness. the graph is the next layer that breakdown, running on Kimi, is below ↓

Annatar.md

78,774 次观看 • 20 天前

Another insane Jev use case! Jev makes it incredibly cheap to evaluate and classify agent runs at scale. And finally, someone open-sourced a self-improving memory layer that can put that capability to work across agent harnesses. It turns your agent sessions into a compounding knowledge layer, where every successful run can make future agents smarter across: - Codex - Claude Code - Cursor - OpenCode and 20+ more Beacon by Asymptote Labs continuously builds a shared history across your agent harnesses and uses Jev to identify the runs worth learning from. It then turns the best workflows, corrections, and debugging patterns into reusable skills. GitHub repo: (don’t forget to star it ⭐) Most agent runs are messy. They contain exploration, failed commands, dead ends, and one-off fixes that should never become permanent memory. So Beacon preserves the full session history, while Jev helps decide what should be promoted, reviewed, or discarded. The recording below shows this in action. Beacon found 579 sessions across 5 coding-agent harnesses and normalized them into one consistent history. From there, Jev surfaces the lessons worth keeping and makes them available across your agent stack. - A pattern learned in Cursor can carry into OpenCode. - A lesson from Claude Code can improve the next Codex run. Every successful run adds to the shared knowledge layer, making future agents smarter. If you want to dive deeper into Jev, I also wrote a breakdown of how it works. The article is quoted below.
0:29

Another insane Jev use case! Jev makes it incredibly cheap to evaluate and classify agent runs at scale. And finally, someone open-sourced a self-improving memory layer that can put that capability to work across agent harnesses. It turns your agent sessions into a compounding knowledge layer, where every successful run can make future agents smarter across: - Codex - Claude Code - Cursor - OpenCode and 20+ more Beacon by Asymptote Labs continuously builds a shared history across your agent harnesses and uses Jev to identify the runs worth learning from. It then turns the best workflows, corrections, and debugging patterns into reusable skills. GitHub repo: (don’t forget to star it ⭐) Most agent runs are messy. They contain exploration, failed commands, dead ends, and one-off fixes that should never become permanent memory. So Beacon preserves the full session history, while Jev helps decide what should be promoted, reviewed, or discarded. The recording below shows this in action. Beacon found 579 sessions across 5 coding-agent harnesses and normalized them into one consistent history. From there, Jev surfaces the lessons worth keeping and makes them available across your agent stack. - A pattern learned in Cursor can carry into OpenCode. - A lesson from Claude Code can improve the next Codex run. Every successful run adds to the shared knowledge layer, making future agents smarter. If you want to dive deeper into Jev, I also wrote a breakdown of how it works. The article is quoted below.

Akshay 🚀

116,880 次观看 • 4 天前

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

31,162 次观看 • 28 天前

Ex-Google engineer just compressed the shift from AI agents to "graphs" and "loops" into one 2h47m lecture: • 00:00 - understanding the different layers of AI memory • 30:00 - moving from simple LLM calls to AI agents • 50:00 - why agent systems are becoming a graph engineering problem • 1:12:00 - connecting context, tools and agent state • 1:24:00 - building a minimal agent harness from scratch • 1:46:00 - breaking down the architecture behind Hermes Agent • 2:08:00 - turning agent concepts into working systems 167-minute deep dive, and one of the clearest ways to understand how AI engineering is moving beyond prompts The progression: Prompt → Context → Memory → Agent → Loop → Graph → Agent Harness Watch it today, then read the full roadmap below
2:47:42

Ex-Google engineer just compressed the shift from AI agents to "graphs" and "loops" into one 2h47m lecture: • 00:00 - understanding the different layers of AI memory • 30:00 - moving from simple LLM calls to AI agents • 50:00 - why agent systems are becoming a graph engineering problem • 1:12:00 - connecting context, tools and agent state • 1:24:00 - building a minimal agent harness from scratch • 1:46:00 - breaking down the architecture behind Hermes Agent • 2:08:00 - turning agent concepts into working systems 167-minute deep dive, and one of the clearest ways to understand how AI engineering is moving beyond prompts The progression: Prompt → Context → Memory → Agent → Loop → Graph → Agent Harness Watch it today, then read the full roadmap below

Morlex

51,952 次观看 • 1 个月前

10 Jev use cases a marketer can see: 1. Lead scoring - You get 100 new leads overnight. Jev can score which ones are most likely to buy. Sales gets the best ones first. 2. Email prioritization - Drop hundreds of emails into it. Jev can score priority, spam, category, and reply probability. 3. Support routing - A client reports a billing issue, another one has an API problem. Jev can instantly decide where each ticket should go. 4. Customer intent - A user visits pricing three times this week. Jev can score how likely they are to upgrade. 5. Marketplace matching - Someone explains exactly what service they need. Jev can score which provider is the closest match. 6. Lead qualification - A prospect fills out your website form. Jev can decide between sales, self-serve, or nurture. 7. Content clipping- Give it a 60-minute podcast transcript. Jev can score the moments most worth clipping. 8. Browser tasks - Tell an agent to find the right hotel. Jev can help choose the best one in 8 seconds. 9. Human vs AI routing - Jev can decide whether it goes to AI or a human. 10. Workflow decisions - Most workflows eventually hit the same question: What should happen next? That's probably the best place to use Jev.
0:22

10 Jev use cases a marketer can see: 1. Lead scoring - You get 100 new leads overnight. Jev can score which ones are most likely to buy. Sales gets the best ones first. 2. Email prioritization - Drop hundreds of emails into it. Jev can score priority, spam, category, and reply probability. 3. Support routing - A client reports a billing issue, another one has an API problem. Jev can instantly decide where each ticket should go. 4. Customer intent - A user visits pricing three times this week. Jev can score how likely they are to upgrade. 5. Marketplace matching - Someone explains exactly what service they need. Jev can score which provider is the closest match. 6. Lead qualification - A prospect fills out your website form. Jev can decide between sales, self-serve, or nurture. 7. Content clipping- Give it a 60-minute podcast transcript. Jev can score the moments most worth clipping. 8. Browser tasks - Tell an agent to find the right hotel. Jev can help choose the best one in 8 seconds. 9. Human vs AI routing - Jev can decide whether it goes to AI or a human. 10. Workflow decisions - Most workflows eventually hit the same question: What should happen next? That's probably the best place to use Jev.

Yum⋆₊˚

130,108 次观看 • 8 天前

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 次观看 • 1 个月前

MOST PEOPLE BUILD AI AGENTS BACKWARDS. They start with prompts, then add tools, memory, subagents, dashboards, and a graph nobody can debug. Then they wonder why the agent is expensive, confused, and unreliable. The better order is simple: harness first loop second graph only when needed A harness gives the model a workspace, tools, permissions, logs, and a definition of done. A loop lets it try, fail, read feedback, repair, and stop. A graph only makes sense when the workflow branches: approvals, parallel work, durable state, different routes, restart recovery. A graph is not a smarter prompt. A loop is not a production system. A harness is not just a system prompt. Most agents do not fail because the model is weak. They fail because nobody defined what success means.
2:07

MOST PEOPLE BUILD AI AGENTS BACKWARDS. They start with prompts, then add tools, memory, subagents, dashboards, and a graph nobody can debug. Then they wonder why the agent is expensive, confused, and unreliable. The better order is simple: harness first loop second graph only when needed A harness gives the model a workspace, tools, permissions, logs, and a definition of done. A loop lets it try, fail, read feedback, repair, and stop. A graph only makes sense when the workflow branches: approvals, parallel work, durable state, different routes, restart recovery. A graph is not a smarter prompt. A loop is not a production system. A harness is not just a system prompt. Most agents do not fail because the model is weak. They fail because nobody defined what success means.

Fluixo

11,328 次观看 • 1 个月前

Another insane Jev use case! Jev is making it dramatically cheaper to evaluate what actually happened inside an agent run. And finally, someone open-sourced a self-improving memory layer that can put that signal to work across agent harnesses: - Claude Code - Codex - Cursor - OpenCode, and 20+ more Beacon by Asymptote Labs continuously captures your agent history across harnesses and uses Jev to identify which runs are actually worth learning from. It then turns the highest-signal workflows, corrections, and debugging patterns into reusable skills. GitHub repo: (don’t forget to star it ⭐ ) Beacon preserves the complete session history. But preserving a run and learning from it are two different things. Most coding-agent sessions contain routine exploration, failed commands, and fixes that only apply to one task. The trace can remain available for inspection without turning every detail into guidance for future agents. Jev scores each run for evidence, reuse potential, and human correction signals. An application policy then decides whether to promote, review, or discard it. The recording shows this in action. Claude receives a coding task, modifies the implementation, and runs the tests. I then provide an edge-case correction, so Claude updates the code and adds regression coverage. Beacon automatically captures the complete session. Jev evaluates whether the correction contains a reusable engineering lesson. Once approved, that lesson becomes available to other coding agents working on the project. Since it works across harnesses: - Claude Code sessions can teach Codex. - Cursor debugging can improve OpenCode. So a problem solved by one agent should not need to be learned from scratch by another. If you want to dive deeper into Jev, I also wrote a hands-on guide to building this Jev-style decision path with open models, entirely locally. Read it below.
0:31

Another insane Jev use case! Jev is making it dramatically cheaper to evaluate what actually happened inside an agent run. And finally, someone open-sourced a self-improving memory layer that can put that signal to work across agent harnesses: - Claude Code - Codex - Cursor - OpenCode, and 20+ more Beacon by Asymptote Labs continuously captures your agent history across harnesses and uses Jev to identify which runs are actually worth learning from. It then turns the highest-signal workflows, corrections, and debugging patterns into reusable skills. GitHub repo: (don’t forget to star it ⭐ ) Beacon preserves the complete session history. But preserving a run and learning from it are two different things. Most coding-agent sessions contain routine exploration, failed commands, and fixes that only apply to one task. The trace can remain available for inspection without turning every detail into guidance for future agents. Jev scores each run for evidence, reuse potential, and human correction signals. An application policy then decides whether to promote, review, or discard it. The recording shows this in action. Claude receives a coding task, modifies the implementation, and runs the tests. I then provide an edge-case correction, so Claude updates the code and adds regression coverage. Beacon automatically captures the complete session. Jev evaluates whether the correction contains a reusable engineering lesson. Once approved, that lesson becomes available to other coding agents working on the project. Since it works across harnesses: - Claude Code sessions can teach Codex. - Cursor debugging can improve OpenCode. So a problem solved by one agent should not need to be learned from scratch by another. If you want to dive deeper into Jev, I also wrote a hands-on guide to building this Jev-style decision path with open models, entirely locally. Read it below.

Avi Chawla

288,967 次观看 • 7 天前

Jev has been blowing up lately. If you've got the Jev API but don't know how to play around with it yet, you can just copy this checklist. 1. jev-ultrafast A high-speed browser Agent built with Browser Use. Jev only judges "what to do, which element to click" at each step, and only calls the small model when typing is needed. Searching for a flight on Google Flights takes about 7 seconds. 2. fast-jev-compaction Context compression for Claude Code. Before each tool call, have Jev judge if there's anything still useful; delete the useless stuff, and keep the original text without rewriting it. 3. json-render Vercel Labs' generative UI framework. In experiments, Jev doesn't write JSON token by token; it just handles selecting components, properties, and layouts. 4. typesafe-mcp Best for people who just got the API. Plug Jev into Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Codex, and Pi, and do Choice / Score / Noul anytime. 5. jev-mcp Ready-made Agent judgment toolkit: fact-checking, content screening, semantic ranking, classification, and information extraction. 6. SemDecide Turn Jev into a command-line tool. Directly classify, score, and filter in the Shell—great for hooking up to crawlers, CI, and data pipelines. 7. jev-codex-router First have Jev judge how hard this round of programming tasks is, then decide the model tier, reasoning depth, and speed mode. 8. Winnow Context garbage collection for Claude Code. When Read / Bash / Grep spits out a ton of stuff, Jev first judges which parts are really relevant to the current task. 9. jev-review Before code review, run it through Jev first to pick out high-risk changes, then hand them off to a pricier big model or a human. Comes with a local dashboard. 10. Blink Use Jev as a code repository navigator. At each directory level, judge which files are most relevant to the current issue, then keep digging down. Copy these complete Jev blueprints - then read full Jev setup below ↓ ↓
0:24

Jev has been blowing up lately. If you've got the Jev API but don't know how to play around with it yet, you can just copy this checklist. 1. jev-ultrafast A high-speed browser Agent built with Browser Use. Jev only judges "what to do, which element to click" at each step, and only calls the small model when typing is needed. Searching for a flight on Google Flights takes about 7 seconds. 2. fast-jev-compaction Context compression for Claude Code. Before each tool call, have Jev judge if there's anything still useful; delete the useless stuff, and keep the original text without rewriting it. 3. json-render Vercel Labs' generative UI framework. In experiments, Jev doesn't write JSON token by token; it just handles selecting components, properties, and layouts. 4. typesafe-mcp Best for people who just got the API. Plug Jev into Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Codex, and Pi, and do Choice / Score / Noul anytime. 5. jev-mcp Ready-made Agent judgment toolkit: fact-checking, content screening, semantic ranking, classification, and information extraction. 6. SemDecide Turn Jev into a command-line tool. Directly classify, score, and filter in the Shell—great for hooking up to crawlers, CI, and data pipelines. 7. jev-codex-router First have Jev judge how hard this round of programming tasks is, then decide the model tier, reasoning depth, and speed mode. 8. Winnow Context garbage collection for Claude Code. When Read / Bash / Grep spits out a ton of stuff, Jev first judges which parts are really relevant to the current task. 9. jev-review Before code review, run it through Jev first to pick out high-risk changes, then hand them off to a pricier big model or a human. Comes with a local dashboard. 10. Blink Use Jev as a code repository navigator. At each directory level, judge which files are most relevant to the current issue, then keep digging down. Copy these complete Jev blueprints - then read full Jev setup below ↓ ↓

rody

199,858 次观看 • 6 天前

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 次观看 • 1 个月前