问HN：代理工作流程如何旨在抵消人工智能债务？
我不知道该怎么表达。但我继承的项目以及我应该推动完成的项目都有一个奇怪的共同点：它们是“未设计”的。
我认为这可能是因为之前考虑过基本设计原则和功能的过程和与上下文相关的代码似乎并不是缺失，而是被模拟了。给人一种经过深思熟虑的印象，这对项目经理来说是很难察觉的。
因此，我现在花了更多的时间回过头来设计这些“未设计”的工作。手动重建那些被抽象掉或完全遗漏的内容，而项目管理层的人认为“这不会花你太多时间”。我将其归因于这个潜在的问题，即事物看起来像是经过设计的。
当这些在大规模部署时，这一切是如何运作的？当AI产生了如此多的技术债务时，效率的提升是否实际上开始变成损失？
我不确定代理工作流如何真正解决这个问题。似乎你可以让代理去做事情，但它们仍然会犯很多错误，你还得插手重建。
查看原文
I don't know quite how to put it. But projects I inherit and am supposed to get over the line have this same strange quality: they are 'undesigned'.<p>I believe this may be because processes and context-related code that was previously considered with basic design principles and functionality seem not so much to be missing, but they have they seem to be simulated. Giving the impression of being considered, which is quite difficult for a project manager to catch.<p>So I'm now spending a lot more time now going back and designing this 'undesigned' work. Rebuilding things manually that was abstracted past or missed entirley, which people at the project management level think "won't take you that long". Which I attribute to this insidious problem of things looking like they were designed.<p>How is this meant to work when deployed at scale? When there is so much technical debt generated by AI, do the efficiency gains actually start to be losses?<p>I'm not sure how agentic workflows can actually solve this. It seems as if you can have agents doing stuff, but they're still going to get a lot wrong and you'll need to drop someone in and rebuild.