LLM Digest
Subscribe

Agent Builder Foundations

Mechanisms, math intuition, evidence, and application

View as JSON

Agent Builder Foundations

Mechanisms behind reliable agents

Durable explanations for builders who want to understand why a prompt, retrieval setup, tool call, memory system, or eval behaves the way it does. Each page separates paper-backed mechanisms, benchmark results, field reports, and LLM Digest synthesis.

25 concepts·7 clusters·evidence-tiered

Recently added evidence

  1. What actually breaks when you run MCP in production, and how do you defend it?MCP Tool Poisoning in Agentic AI Frameworks: A Cross-Framework Measurement Study Benchmark
  2. What actually breaks when you run MCP in production, and how do you defend it?Signed, Sealed, Leaked: Trust Beyond Signature for MCP Toolchains Benchmark
  3. What actually breaks when you run MCP in production, and how do you defend it?Beyond Prompt Injection: The Tool Update Gap in LLM Agent Security Benchmark
  4. What should an agent eval actually measure?Silent Instrument Errors Reorder Agent Leaderboards Benchmark
  5. What should an agent eval actually measure?Who Verifies the Tools? How Warped Formatters Mislead Agents and Their Verifiers Benchmark
  6. Why do LLM caches fail silently?Cross-request KV cache exposure in the GLM-5.3 Workers AI model, and our remediation with SGLang Field report
  7. Why do LLM caches fail silently?Silent and Costly: Characterizing and Detecting Prompt-Caching Mis-Integration in LLM Agents Benchmark
  8. Why can a permission check that's correct for a single tool call still let an agent break the rules across many?Permission to Retry: A Study of Authorization and Recovery in AI Agent Workflows Theory

Prompting and instruction following

Retrieval and grounding

Tool use and agents

Memory and context

  • Why does adding more context sometimes hurt an agent?

    Most production agent failures trace back to unmanaged context, not weak reasoning. Treating context as a lifecycle to architect, ingest, scope, anticipate, and compact keeps token cost linear instead of quadratic…

    5 sources
    updated Oct 23, 2026
  • Why does CLAUDE.md (or AGENTS.md) only ever grow, never shrink?

    Agent instruction files grow because appending a rule is cheap while proving a rule is safe to delete becomes combinatorial once its rationale is forgotten. A 1,867-repository study found these files more than…

    3 sources
    updated Oct 6, 2026
  • Can you trust what your agent remembers?

    Persistent agent memory is a write-once, replay-many attack surface. 2026 benchmarks show attackers can forge an agent's own reasoning history or plant poisoned facts through routine content like email, with high…

    4 sources
    updated Oct 6, 2026

Evals and reliability

  • What should an agent eval actually measure?

    A useful agent eval grades the trajectory as well as the output, matches grader cost to check frequency, repeats runs per configuration, and is audited as hard as the agent: fixing one eval moved a score from 42% to 95%.

    8 sources
    updated Nov 4, 2026
  • Does adding memory to an agent actually make it better?

    Three independent 2026 evaluations agree agent memory is not a universal win: one technique gains one model 16 points of task completion and another zero, and every memory framework one benchmark tested scored worse…

    4 sources
    updated Oct 6, 2026
  • Does a high benchmark score predict production reliability?

    A benchmark pass rate is one round of scoring on fixed tasks, over a short horizon, on one infrastructure setup. Optimization gains can regress on the next round, long sessions surface failures short tasks cannot, and…

    6 sources
    updated Oct 6, 2026
  • Can you trust an LLM-as-judge score?

    An LLM judge is a measurement instrument with its own biases, not ground truth — validate it the same way you validate the agent it grades, and for agent trajectories with checkable evidence, consider a deterministic…

    8 sources
    updated Oct 21, 2026
  • Can you evaluate an agent's model router by replaying logged trajectories?

    No. Forking live SWE-bench agent runs at a model swap shows 61-94% of later actions diverge from the log, leaving 3% of logged states valid, so replay evaluation mispredicted every outcome that depended on the swap.

    3 sources
    updated Oct 16, 2026

Cost, latency, and operations

Safety and control