It's like the love child of Polytopia and Conductor. As many other agent management platforms/harnesses, Viberia has been building itself, and honestly this has been too much fun to stop.
Just use direnv? You’ll probably need to adjust the port you are hosting the local page on, but that’s just N=mod(hash based on the worktree name) and then port=default_port+N.
Tell your claude to set this up. Should do it in a single prompt
Gpt-5.3-codex is miles better than 5.4 in that regard. It’s better at orchestration, and does the things that it said it did. Haven’t tested 5.5 yet but using 5.4 for exploration + brainstorming and handing over the findings to 5.3-codex works pretty well
Great work but why not use C# instead of GDScript?
LLMs are really good at C# (and tscn files for some reason), so that solves the "LLMs suck at GDScript" problem. Also, C# can be cheaper in terms of token usage (even accounting for not having to load the additional APIs): one agent writes the interfaces, another one fills in the details.
Saying this because I had really enjoyed vibecoding a Godot game in C# - and it was REALLY painful to vibecode with GDScript.
This is amazing. I checked some games and the blunders make me think that the LLMs are not really great at forecasting what happens if they play X on Y.
Can you actually introduce that into the decision making? That is, you would:
1. Have the LLM come up with N many potential actions
2. Run XMage run in parallel and provide the outcome for each different action
3. Revert XMage to the original state
4. Provide the LLM with the different outcomes and have them choose the action/outcome pair rather than just the action
This would actually help them analyze the counterfactual outcomes more effectively and should prevent 99% of the blunders
If you happen to be token rich, you could even do this in a MCTS manner and have them think really deep
Not yet unfortunately, but I'm in the process of building one.
This was my journey: I vibe-coded an Electron app and ended up with a terrible monolithic architecture, and mostly badly written code. Then, I took the app's architecture docs and spent a lot of my time shouting "MAKE THIS ARCHITECTURE MORE ORTHOGONAL, SOLID, KISS, DRY" to gpt-5-pro, and ended up with a 1500+ liner monster doc.
I'm now turning this into a Tauri app and following the new architecture to a T. I would say that it is has a pretty clean structure with multiple microservices.
Now, new features are gated based on the architecture doc, so I'm always maintaining a single source of truth that serves as the main context for any new discussions/features. Also, each microservice has its own README file(s) which are updated with each code change.
IMHO, jumping from Level 2 to Level 5 is a matter of:
- Better structured codebases - we need hierarchical codebases with minimal depth, maximal orthogonality and reasonable width. Think microservices.
- Better documentation - most code documentations are not built to handle updates. We need a proper graph structure with few sources of truth that get propagated downstream. Again, some optimal sort of hierarchy is crucial here.
At this point, I really don't think that we necessarily need better agents.
Setup your codebase optimally, spin up 5-10 instances of gpt-5-codex-high for each issue/feature/refactor (pick the best according to some criteria) and your life will go smoothly
I'm Schmidhuber neutral, but the word on the street is that he is a major asshole and sometimes impossible to work with. His research might be more solid than the Turing award winners but his personality truly kept him behind.
I have been thinking about the exact same problem for a while and was literally hours away from publishing a blogpost on the subject.
+100 on the footnote:
> agents or workflows?
Workflows. Workflows, all the way.
The agents can start using these workflows once they are actually ready to execute stuff with high precision. And, by then we would have figured out how to create effective, accurate and easily diagnozable workflows, so people will stop complaining about "I want to know what's going on inside the black box".