Correcting an AI Agent Twice Means a Missing Workflow Rule
jonah_omninode · reddit · 2026-08-13
The author shares engineering best practices for AI agent workflows: if you have to correct the same type of agent error twice, it indicates a missing rule in your workflow.
- Core Insight: Stop just patching prompts. Repetitive corrections should be transformed into hard workflow checks (e.g., requiring source revisions or artifact validation as proof of completion).
- Evaluation Criteria: Before automating a correction, assess if the rule is stable, if the failure matters, and what a false rejection would cost.
- Takeaway: Treat human corrections as valuable process data revealing where the system lacks explicit constraints, rather than just wasted time.
More from coding & agent
- OpenAI Models Struggle with Minesweeper: Dev Seeks Prompt Optimization — NazgulResebo · 2026-08-13
- Keep: A Shared Memory Notepad for AI Coding Agents — iannuttall · 2026-08-13
- Zachary Lipton: A God-Tier Code Refactoring Model is a Trillion-Dollar Opportunity — zacharylipton · 2026-08-13
- Strix: Open-Source AI Pentesting Tool Autonomously Finds and Validates Vulnerabilities — alex_verem · 2026-08-13
- Indie Hacker Details 10 AI Automations Transforming His Local Business — boringmarketer · 2026-08-13
- OpenAI Codex Criticized: Black Box During Work, Users Left Guessing — OfirPress · 2026-08-13