Track 09 · AI Agents · 14 min
AI that plans. AI that acts.
The 2026 shift: from chatbots that talk to agents that do. Browse the web, write the code, file the ticket, fix the bug, ship the PR. Six interactive demos cover the agent loop, tool use, MCP, multi-agent orchestration, and the platforms reshaping software in real time.
“The unit of AI is no longer the message. It's the task.”
#The hook
This is the field manual for the architecture, with six interactive demos.
#Why this matters in 2026 — the receipts
Agents by the numbers
The 'do, don't talk' shift
78%
SWE-bench solved (Claude Opus 4.7)
Anthropic 2026
30%
Code at Anthropic written by Claude
Anthropic 2025
100+
MCP servers in the official registry
MCP, 2026
$1B+
Agent-startup funding raised in 2025
Crunchbase
78%
SWE-bench Verified — Claude Opus 4.7
In 2023, no AI scored above 5% on SWE-bench Verified, the gold-standard benchmark for autonomous software engineering. By mid-2026, Claude Opus 4.7 sits above 78%. That number is roughly the difference between 'AI as toy' and 'AI as colleague'. Software is the first knowledge-work field where the ladder is being climbed in public, in real time.
Anthropic, swebench.com, 2026
Vocabulary
Six agent terms in every paper
Concept
Tool
An external function the agent can call — read_file, web_search, run_bash.
Like: A hand that the LLM brain can move.
e.g. JSON-schema'd functions
Concept
ReAct
Reasoning + Acting interleave — think, act, observe, repeat.
Like: A pilot's checklist with reasoning between steps.
e.g. Original 2023 ReAct paper
Concept
MCP
Model Context Protocol — Anthropic's open tool-exposure standard.
Like: USB for AI tools — universal connector.
e.g. 100+ official servers
Concept
Reflexion
Self-critique step before acting again. Lifts SWE-bench scores ~2x.
Like: Reviewing your work before submitting.
e.g. Shinn et al, 2023
Concept
Tree-of-thought
Explore many candidate plans, prune, pick the best.
Like: Chess engine searching ahead.
e.g. Inner loop of o-series, Opus 4.7 reasoning
Concept
Worktree
A separate working directory tied to your repo — for parallel agent work.
Like: Multiple monitors for one brain.
e.g. git worktree add ../feat-auth feat/auth
#The agent loop
The mental model
The 4-step loop every agent runs
1. Plan
Decide what to doThe LLM reads the goal + current state, produces a step-by-step plan or a single next action.
- Chain-of-thought, tree-of-thought, ReAct — different reasoning patterns.
- Reasoning models (o-series, Claude Opus 4.7) plan dramatically better.
- Plan quality is the single biggest agent-quality lever.
2. Act (tool use)
Run a toolCall an external function: read_file, write_file, run_bash, web_search, send_email.
- Tools are the agent's hands. Without tools, an agent is just a chatbot.
- JSON-schema tool definitions are the standard interface.
- MCP standardized tool exposure across providers in 2024-2025.
3. Observe
See the resultThe tool returns a result (file contents, search results, error message). Agent reads it.
- Truncating tool output to fit context is a constant tension.
- Structured outputs let the agent parse results reliably.
- Tool errors are the most common failure mode — handle them gracefully.
4. Reflect & repeat
Did it work?Did the action move us toward the goal? If yes, continue. If no, replan.
- Self-critique improves agent quality dramatically.
- Reflexion (Shinn et al, 2023) showed reflection alone can ~double SWE-bench scores.
- Most production agents have an explicit reflection step.
#See the loop
#Tools — the agent's hands
An agent with no tools is a chatbot. The right set of tools is what makes an agent powerful.
#MCP — the universal tool interface
#Memory — what the agent remembers
A useful agent remembers things across actions and across sessions. There are four kinds of memory:
#Multi-agent — when one isn't enough
For complex tasks, multiple agents collaborate — a planner agent decomposes the work, specialist agents handle subtasks, a supervisor reviews. CrewAI, AutoGen, LangGraph all bet on this model.
#Tree of thought — explore multiple plans
The reasoning pattern that broke math benchmarks: instead of generating one chain of thought, generate many — and pick the best one.
#A real-ish agent — runnable
# A toy agent loop in pure Python
import json
# Pretend tools — in a real agent these'd hit real APIs
def search_docs(query):
return f"[search results for '{query}']: docs about RAG, agents, MCP"
def write_file(path, content):
return f"wrote {len(content)} chars to {path}"
TOOLS = {"search_docs": search_docs, "write_file": write_file}
# Pretend LLM — in a real agent, ask Claude/GPT for the next action
def llm_decide(goal, history):
"""Toy planner: decides what tool to call next based on history length."""
if len(history) == 0:
return {"tool": "search_docs", "args": {"query": "agent loop"}}
elif len(history) == 1:
return {"tool": "write_file",
"args": {"path": "summary.md", "content": "Agents = LLM + tools + loop."}}
else:
return {"tool": None, "answer": "Done!"}
# The agent loop
goal = "Write a summary of how agents work to summary.md"
history = []
print(f"Goal: {goal}\n")
for step in range(5):
decision = llm_decide(goal, history)
if decision.get("tool") is None:
print(f"Step {step}: FINISHED -> {decision['answer']}")
break
tool_name = decision["tool"]
args = decision["args"]
print(f"Step {step}: calling {tool_name}({json.dumps(args)})")
result = TOOLS[tool_name](**args)
print(f" result: {result}")
history.append({"tool": tool_name, "args": args, "result": result})llm_decide for an actual LLM API call, and TOOLS for real read_file/write_file/web_search/MCP-server connectors. Everything else is identical.#What's been built with agents
Agents in production
What 'AI that does' has actually shipped
Agentic CLI
Claude Code
78%
SWE-bench score
Anthropic's coding agent. Works in your terminal, edits files, runs tests, opens PRs.
Coding agent
AI-native IDE
Cursor
1M+
Paid users
VS Code fork with deep agent integration. Composer mode = full agent loop in your editor.
IDE agent
Autonomous SWE
Devin (Cognition)
13%
SWE-bench (2024)
First public 'fully autonomous engineer'. Made the case agents could ship real PRs. Ongoing.
Multi-agent
Computer use
OpenAI Operator
100%
Browser interactions automated
Operator drives a real browser, clicks buttons, fills forms. Anthropic's computer use API does the same.
Computer use
Build & deploy
Replit Agent
1M+
Apps generated
Tell it 'build me an X', watch a full app appear and deploy. Targeted at non-engineers.
Full-stack agent
First viral agent
AutoGPT (legacy)
150K+
GitHub stars
Spring 2023's viral 'put GPT-4 in a loop' demo. Crude, but it convinced everyone the agent era was coming.
OG agent
#The 2026 frontier
#Where to go next
- AI Agents track — 16 lessons: agent loop, tool use, MCP, multi-agent, computer use.
- Claude Code Mastery — the canonical coding agent.
- NLP & Transformers — every agent has an LLM in its planner box.
- RAG Systems — agents need memory. RAG is the foundation.
#Key takeaways
Key Takeaways
- An agent is an LLM that takes goals, plans, runs tools, observes results, and replans. The loop is concrete.
- Tools are the agent's hands. Without tools an 'agent' is just a chatbot.
- MCP (Model Context Protocol) standardized tool exposure across providers. Now the field default.
- Memory has four types: working, short-term, long-term, procedural. Each requires different storage.
- Multi-agent systems collaborate on complex tasks — planner + specialists + supervisor.
- 2026 frontier: computer use, reasoning agents, multi-agent at scale, proper agent benchmarks.
#References & further reading
- Anthropic — Building Effective Agents (2024). The most important field-guide article.
- Yao et al. — ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting (ICLR 2023). The reasoning-acting interleave pattern.
- Shinn et al. — Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning (NeurIPS 2023). Reflection.
- Model Context Protocol spec (modelcontextprotocol.io). Anthropic's open standard.
- SWE-bench (swebench.com) — the canonical agent benchmark.
- Lilian Weng — LLM-powered Autonomous Agents (lilianweng.github.io). Foundational survey.