[jrvarela56]

This applies to coding agents. If the agent can't run the code, it's unlikely that it can produce working code. Add to running: linting, running tests, compiling, code review and any other tool/process humans do to check if software is 'good' or working.

If the agent can apply these processes to the output, then we're on our way to getting good chunk of our work done for us. Even from the product pov, if the agent is allowed to experiment by making deployments and check user-facing metrics, it eventually could build software product - but we should still solve the coding part as it seems easier to objectively verify quickly.

[jgalt212]

You're right, but actually running the code can be destructive (even when run as intended). You really need to be careful about dev environments. Even the destructive operations will cost you time (and money) in resetting the dev environment.

[jrvarela56]

Agreed and I think this highlights the importance of interactivity/snappiness as well as idempotency. This is needed for a human to play around with also.

If the agent has fast+safe feeback loop to experiment then it can go through more cycles, faster, and improve its output.