@patrickhannigan No agenda beyond curiosity, would you be open to a short call to talk through how you're thinking about the agent/grounding layer? Happy to share what's worked and hasn't in my experience.
@patrickhannigan The problem you're describing (agents that act on a marketer's behalf, grounded in real campaign data rather than generic output) is close to things I've built before.
5/ We're accumulating debt in code, people, and knowledge simultaneously. At AI speed.
So genuine question:
What are YOU doing to solve this?
Explanation gates before merging AI code? Intent audits? Pair reviews?
Or shipping fast and hoping for the best?
Reply 👇
AI writes 30-40% of prod code now.
We track technical debt.
But 3 papers from 2026 say there are two more kinds silently destroying your codebase — and nobody is measuring them.
Thread 🧵
4/ The paper calls them "Fragile Experts."
High output. Critically low corrective competence.
They look like your best engineers — until production breaks at 2am and the AI is down.
Most startups building on top of LLMs are quietly burning money on tokens.
Not because their prompts are bad.
Because their retrieval pipeline is inefficient.
I’m currently implementing it from scratch and benchmarking it against a real production codebase.
Early results are showing 60–70% token reduction without sacrificing output quality.
Once guest RAM and vCPU state are gone, “resume” is a lie. It’s a replay.
This is why agents feel flaky:
They’re logically continuous but physically rebooted.
Following up on my last post
A few people may asked: “Why not just checkpoint containers or restart faster?”
Because at the VM level, most platforms don’t actually pause execution.
They terminate the VMM, drop guest RAM and reboot from disk.
But disk isn’t the agent’s brain.
RAM is.
Things agents keep only in memory:
- vector indexes
- runtime caches
- interpreter & planner state
- browser / JS engine state