Skip to content Skip to footer
0 items - $0.00 0

LLM Agents Are Simply Graph – Tutorial for Dummies by zh2408

LLM Agents Are Simply Graph – Tutorial for Dummies by zh2408

LLM Agents Are Simply Graph – Tutorial for Dummies by zh2408

8 Comments

  • Post Author
    zh2408
    Posted March 19, 2025 at 9:29 pm

    Hey folks! I just posted a quick tutorial explaining how LLM agents (like OpenAI Agents, Pydantic AI, Manus AI, AutoGPT or PerplexityAI) are basically small graphs with loops and branches. For example:

    OpenAI Agents: for the workflow logic: https://github.com/openai/openai-agents-python/blob/48ff99bb…

    Pydantic Agents: organizes steps in a graph: https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-ai/blob/4c0f384a0626299…

    Langchain: demonstrates the loop structure: https://github.com/langchain-ai/langchain/blob/4d1d726e61ed5…

    If all the hype has been confusing, this guide shows how they actually work under the hood, with simple examples. Check it out!

    https://zacharyhuang.substack.com/p/llm-agent-internal-as-a-…

  • Post Author
    mentalgear
    Posted March 19, 2025 at 10:34 pm

    Everything that was previously just called automation or pipeline processing on-top of LLM is now the buzzword "agents". The hype bubble needs constant feeding to keep from imploding.

  • Post Author
    campbel
    Posted March 19, 2025 at 10:55 pm

    I follow Mr. Huang, read/watch his content and also plan to use PocketFlow in some cases. A preamble, because I don't agree with this assessment. I think agents as nodes in a DAG workflow is _an_ implementation of an agentic system, but is not the systems I most often interact with (e.g. Cursor, Claude + MCP).

    Agentic systems can be simply the LLM + prompting + tools[1]. LLMs are more than capable (especially chain-of thought models) to breakdown problems into steps, analyze necessary tools to use and then executing the steps in sequence. All of this is done with the model in the driver seat.

    I think the system described in the post need a different name. It's a traditional workflow system with an agent operating on individual tasks. Its more rigid in that the workflow is setup ahead of time. Typical agentic systems are largely undefined or defined via prompting. For some use cases this rigidity is a feature.

    [1 https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/build-with-claude/tool-us…

  • Post Author
    _pdp_
    Posted March 19, 2025 at 11:07 pm

    It is hard to put a pin on this one because there are so many thing wrong with this definition. There are agent frameworks that are not rebranded workflow tools too. I don't think this article helps explain anything except putting the intended audience in the same box of mind we were stuck since the invention of programming – i.e. it does not help.

    Forget about boxes and deterministic control and start thinking of error tolerance and recovery. That is what agents are all about.

  • Post Author
    miguelinho
    Posted March 19, 2025 at 11:48 pm

    Great write up! In my opinion, your description likely accurately models what AI agents are doing. Perhaps the graph could be static or dynamic. Either way – it makes sense! Also, thank you for removing the hype!

  • Post Author
    jumploops
    Posted March 20, 2025 at 1:44 am

    Anthropic[0] and Google[1] are both pushing for a clear definition of an “agent” vs. an “agentic workflow”

    tl;dr from Anthropic:

    > Workflows are systems where LLMs and tools are orchestrated through predefined code paths.

    > Agents, on the other hand, are systems where LLMs dynamically direct their own processes and tool usage, maintaining control over how they accomplish tasks.

    Most “agents” today fall into the workflow category.

    The foundation model makers are pushing their new models to be better at the second, “pure” agent, approach.

    In practice, I’m not sure how effective the “pure” approach will work for most LLM-assisted tasks.

    I liken it to a fresh intern who shows up with amnesia every day.

    Even if you tell them what they did yesterday, they’re still liable to take a different path for today’s work.

    My hunch is that we’ll see an evolution of this terminology, and agents of the future will still have some “guiderails” (note: not necessarily _guard_rails), that makes their behavior more predictable over long horizons.

    [0]https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/building-effective-age…

    [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qd6anWv0mv0

  • Post Author
    bckr
    Posted March 20, 2025 at 2:40 am

    Anyone succeeding with agents in production? Other than cursor :)

  • Post Author
    DrFalkyn
    Posted March 20, 2025 at 4:04 am

    I think the model he is looking for is a deterministic finite automata (DFA)

Leave a comment

In the Shadows of Innovation”

© 2025 HackTech.info. All Rights Reserved.

Sign Up to Our Newsletter

Be the first to know the latest updates

Whoops, you're not connected to Mailchimp. You need to enter a valid Mailchimp API key.