agentbee / dev /dev_260101_04_level3_task_workflow_design.md
mangubee's picture
Stage 3: Core Logic Implementation - LLM Integration
4c0b7eb
|
raw
history blame
3.64 kB

[dev_260101_04] Level 3 Task & Workflow Design Decisions

Date: 2026-01-01 Type: Development Status: Resolved Related Dev: dev_260101_03

Problem Description

Applied Level 3 Task & Workflow Design parameters from AI Agent System Design Framework to define task decomposition strategy and workflow execution pattern for GAIA benchmark agent MVP.


Key Decisions

Parameter 1: Task Decomposition → Dynamic planning

  • Reasoning: GAIA questions vary widely in complexity and required tool combinations
  • Evidence: Cannot use static pipeline - each question requires analyzing intent, then planning multi-step approach dynamically
  • Implication: Agent must generate execution plan per question based on question analysis

Parameter 2: Workflow Pattern → Sequential

  • Reasoning: Agent follows linear reasoning chain with dependencies between steps
  • Execution flow: (1) Parse question → (2) Plan approach → (3) Execute tool calls → (4) Synthesize factoid answer
  • Evidence: Each step depends on previous step's output - no parallel execution needed
  • Implication: Sequential workflow pattern fits question-answering nature (vs routing/orchestrator-worker for multi-agent)

Parameter 3: Task Prioritization → N/A (single task processing)

  • Reasoning: GAIA benchmark processes one question at a time in zero-shot evaluation
  • Evidence: No multi-task scheduling required - agent answers one question per invocation
  • Implication: No task queue, priority system, or LLM-based scheduling needed
  • Alignment: Matches zero-shot stateless design (Level 1, Level 5)

Rejected alternatives:

  • Static pipeline: Cannot handle diverse GAIA question types requiring different tool combinations
  • Reactive decomposition: Less efficient than planning upfront for factoid question-answering
  • Parallel workflow: GAIA reasoning chains have linear dependencies
  • Routing pattern: Inappropriate for single-agent architecture (Level 2 decision)

Future experimentation:

  • Reflection pattern: Self-critique and refinement loops for improved answer quality
  • ReAct pattern: Reasoning-Action interleaving for more adaptive execution
  • Current MVP: Sequential + Dynamic planning for baseline performance

Outcome

Established MVP workflow architecture: Dynamic planning with sequential execution. Agent analyzes each question, generates step-by-step plan, executes tools sequentially, synthesizes factoid answer.

Deliverables:

  • dev/dev_260101_04_level3_task_workflow_design.md - Level 3 workflow design decisions

Workflow Specifications:

  • Task Decomposition: Dynamic planning per question
  • Execution Pattern: Sequential reasoning chain
  • Future Enhancement: Reflection/ReAct patterns for advanced iterations

Learnings and Insights

Pattern discovered: MVP approach favors simplicity (Sequential + Dynamic) before complexity (Reflection/ReAct). Baseline performance measurement enables informed optimization decisions.

Design philosophy: Start with linear workflow, measure performance, then add complexity (self-reflection, adaptive reasoning) only if needed.

Critical connection: Level 3 workflow patterns will be implemented in Level 6 using specific framework capabilities (LangGraph/AutoGen/CrewAI).

Changelog

What was changed:

  • Created dev/dev_260101_04_level3_task_workflow_design.md - Level 3 task & workflow design decisions
  • Referenced AI Agent System Design Framework (2026-01-01).pdf Level 3 parameters
  • Documented future experimentation plans (Reflection/ReAct patterns)