World's Fair 2025
Break It 'Til You Make It: Building the Self-Improving Stack for AI Agents - Aparna Dhinakaran
Overview
This talk addresses the challenges of building and iterating on AI agents, particularly in evaluating their performance and identifying bottlenecks. It emphasizes the need for systematic evaluation beyond manual inspection of a few examples. The core thesis is that a self-improving stack for AI agents requires not only improving the agent's prompts and models but also continuously refining the evaluation methods themselves.
Who should watch
- AI Engineers
- Product Managers
- Builders working on agent development
- Teams struggling with agent iteration and production issues
- Those looking to implement systematic evaluation for AI agents
Key takeaways
- Building AI agents involves significant iteration on prompts, models, and tool definitions, which is often done manually and unsystematically.
- Evaluating agents requires looking beyond individual tool calls to assess entire trajectories, including the order of tool execution.
- Multi-turn conversations introduce complexity, necessitating evaluation of context retention and consistency across turns.
- A key challenge is identifying bottlenecks within an agent's architecture, such as specific sub-agents or tool calls that consistently produce poor results.
- The evaluation process itself needs to be iterative; eval prompts should be refined alongside agent prompts to ensure accurate failure case identification.
- *The eval prompts that you're actually using end up becoming crucial to calling out what you need to improve.*
- Two iterative loops are essential: one for improving the agent application prompts and another for refining the evaluation prompts.
- Tools like Arise Phoenix offer open-source solutions for running these evaluations and understanding agent performance.
Notable quotes
*Building agents is incredibly hard. There is a lot of iteration that goes on at the prompt level, at the model level, at iterating on the different tool call definitions.*
*The eval prompts that you're actually using, which is kind of the crux of how you identify those failure cases, end up becoming crucial to calling out what you need to improve.*
Unofficial community note. Prefer the recording for nuance.