use types for llm pull

[amikofalvy]

No description provided.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
agents-manage-api	Ready	Preview	Comment	Sep 27, 2025 1:15am
agents-manage-ui	Error			Sep 27, 2025 1:15am
agents-run-api	Error			Sep 27, 2025 1:15am

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
agents-docs	Skipped			Sep 27, 2025 1:15am

[claude]

Claude finished @amikofalvy's task —— View job

---

TypeScript Staff Engineer Code Review

I've completed a comprehensive analysis of this PR that introduces type definitions for LLM pull functionality. Here are my findings and recommendations:

🎯 Purpose & Architecture Assessment

This PR introduces a builder-types.ts module that centralizes type exports and provides examples for LLM generation in the CLI's pull command. The intent is sound - providing comprehensive type information to help LLMs generate better TypeScript code when pulling agent configurations.

🔍 Key Findings & Areas for Consideration

✅ Well-Designed Aspects

1. Centralized Type Export Strategy: The approach of creating a dedicated builder-types.ts file is architecturally sound for providing a single source of truth for LLM context.

2. Practical Examples: The BUILDER_EXAMPLES constant provides concrete usage patterns that will help LLMs generate idiomatic code.

3. Comprehensive Coverage: The re-exports cover all major builder function parameter types needed for code generation.

🔧 Critical Areas for Improvement

1. Type Safety & Consistency Issues

packages/agents-sdk/src/builder-types.ts:46-80

// Re-export builder-specific config types
export type {
  MCPServerConfig,
  DataComponentConfig,
  ArtifactComponentConfig,
  AgentMcpConfig,
  ToolExecuteFunction,
  TransferConditionFunction,
} from './builders';

Issue: The re-export pattern here creates potential inconsistencies. Some types are re-exported from './types' while others from './builders', creating multiple sources of truth for related concepts.

Recommendation:

• Consolidate related types in a single module or create a clear hierarchy
• Consider using namespace exports to group related types logically
• Add JSDoc comments explaining the purpose of each type group

2. Missing Type Validation & Runtime Safety

packages/agents-sdk/src/builder-types.ts:89-158

export const BUILDER_EXAMPLES = {
  agent: `const qaAgent = agent({
  id: 'qa-agent',
  name: 'QA Agent',
  prompt: 'You are a helpful QA agent...',
  // ...
});`,
  // ... more examples
} as const;

Critical Issue: These examples are string literals without type validation. If the underlying APIs change, these examples could become outdated and mislead the LLM.

Recommendation:

// Better approach - use actual typed examples
export const BUILDER_EXAMPLES = {
  agent: {
    description: 'Creates an agent with QA capabilities',
    example: `const qaAgent = agent({
  id: 'qa-agent',
  name: 'QA Agent',
  prompt: 'You are a helpful QA agent...',
  canUse: () => [searchTool, factsTool],
  canTransferTo: () => [routerAgent],
  models: { base: { model: 'gpt-4o-mini' } }
});`,
    // Could even include a factory function that generates valid examples
    createExample: (config: Partial<AgentConfig>) => { /* generate example */ }
  }
} as const;

3. LLM Generation Integration Concerns

agents-cli/src/commands/pull.llm-generate.ts:53-123

function generateBuilderTypeContext(): string {
  return `
BUILDER FUNCTION TYPES AND SIGNATURES:
// ...
${Object.entries(BUILDER_EXAMPLES).map(([functionName, example]) => `
${functionName.toUpperCase()} BUILDER:
${example}
`).join('\n')}

Issues:

1. String-based Type Information: The type information is converted to string format, losing type safety
2. Manual Maintenance: The type descriptions are hardcoded and could drift from actual implementations
3. No Version Correlation: No mechanism to ensure LLM context matches the SDK version being used

Recommendation: Consider generating type information programmatically:

// Generate from actual TypeScript AST or use TypeScript Compiler API
import { generateTypeDeclarations } from './type-generator';

function generateBuilderTypeContext(): string {
  const typeInfo = generateTypeDeclarations([
    'AgentConfig',
    'GraphConfig', 
    'MCPToolConfig'
  ]);
  
  return typeInfo.map(type => `${type.name}: ${type.definition}`).join('\n');
}

4. Architectural Inconsistency

packages/agents-sdk/src/index.ts:43-45

// Export builder types for tooling and LLM generation
export type * from './builder-types';
export { BUILDER_EXAMPLES } from './builder-types';

Issue: Mixing runtime exports (BUILDER_EXAMPLES) with pure type exports creates an unclear API surface. The BUILDER_EXAMPLES is primarily for build-time/CLI usage, not runtime SDK usage.

Recommendation:

• Consider separate entry points for tooling vs runtime APIs
• Document the intended usage clearly
• Maybe create @inkeep/agents-sdk/tooling subpath export

🏗️ System Design Considerations

1. Extensibility & Future-Proofing

The current approach requires manual updates to BUILDER_EXAMPLES when new builder functions are added. Consider:

// Auto-discovery pattern
export const generateBuilderExamples = () => {
  const builders = [agent, agentGraph, mcpTool, /* ... */];
  return builders.reduce((examples, builder) => {
    examples[builder.name] = builder.getExample?.() || generateDefaultExample(builder);
    return examples;
  }, {});
};

2. Performance Implications

agents-cli/src/commands/pull.llm-generate.ts:195-242
The generateTextWithPlaceholders function introduces complexity but provides token optimization. Consider:

• Adding metrics to track effectiveness
• Caching placeholder mappings for repeated operations
• Providing configuration to disable optimization if it causes issues

3. Documentation & Developer Experience

Missing Documentation: The PR lacks documentation explaining:

• How the type system integrates with LLM generation
• When developers should update BUILDER_EXAMPLES
• How to extend the system for new builder patterns

📊 Testing & Quality Assurance

Critical Gap: No tests are included for the new type system. Based on CLAUDE.md requirements, this PR should include:

1. Unit Tests for type exports and example generation
2. Integration Tests for LLM generation with the new types
3. UI Components if this affects the agent builder interface

🔒 Security & Error Boundaries

The LLM generation functions include proper timeout handling and error boundaries, which is good. However, consider:

• Validating generated TypeScript code before writing to files
• Sandboxing the code generation process
• Adding rate limiting for LLM API calls

📝 Recommendations Summary

High Priority (Must Fix)

1. Add comprehensive test coverage per repository requirements
2. Consolidate type exports to avoid multiple sources of truth
3. Add programmatic type validation for examples
4. Document the integration between types and LLM generation

Medium Priority (Should Consider)

1. Implement auto-discovery for builder examples
2. Add metrics for placeholder optimization effectiveness
3. Create separate tooling entry points
4. Add runtime validation for generated code

Low Priority (Nice to Have)

1. Use TypeScript Compiler API for type information generation
2. Add configuration for disabling optimizations
3. Create visual documentation showing type relationships

🎯 Verdict

This PR addresses a legitimate need and takes a pragmatic approach, but it needs refinement before merge. The core concept is solid, but the implementation has several areas that could lead to maintenance burden and inconsistencies over time.

The most critical issues are the lack of testing (required by repo guidelines) and the potential for type drift between examples and actual implementations.

---

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity.
It will be closed in 7 days if no further activity occurs.

If this PR is still relevant:

• Rebase it on the latest main branch
• Add a comment explaining its current status
• Request a review if it's ready

Thank you for your contributions!

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically closed due to inactivity.

If you'd like to continue working on this, please:

1. Create a new branch from the latest main
2. Cherry-pick your commits or rebase your changes
3. Open a new pull request

Thank you for your understanding!