Homeβ€Ί Knowledge Baseβ€Ί An AI agent

An AI agent is a system built around a large language model that does not just answer a question but pursues a goal by taking actions in a loop. Where a plain chatbot maps one prompt to one reply, an agent runs a cycle: it reasons about what to do next, calls a tool to actually do it, observes the result, and repeats β€” continuing until the task is finished. This loop, plus the tools the model can reach, is what turns a fluent text predictor into something that can search the web, run code, query a database, or operate other software on your behalf. Agents are the fastest-moving frontier in applied AI, and the reason "chat" is giving way to "do it for me."\n\n``svg\n\n \n AI Agents β€” an LLM That Acts in a Loop\n not just answering β€” the model reasons, calls a tool, reads the result, and repeats until the goal is met\n \n GOAL\n what to achieve\n \n LLM β€” reason & plan\n decide the next step\n \n ACTION\n emit a tool call\n \n TOOLS\n search Β· code Β· database Β· APIs\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n observation β€” feed the tool result back in, then loop\n \n FINAL ANSWER\n when the goal is met\n \n \n done?\n \n Function calling β€” a structured call\n The model does not run tools; it emits JSON that a\n harness executes, then returns the result as text.\n \n {\n "tool": "web_search",\n "args": { "query": "Q3 GPU revenue" }\n }\n \n What turns a chatbot into an agent\n \n Tools\n reach past text β€” act on the world\n \n Memory\n short-term scratchpad + long-term store\n \n Planning\n decompose, reflect, retry on failure\n \n Autonomy\n 1 call β†’ workflow β†’ self-directed loop\n\n``\n\nThe core mechanism is an observe–reason–act loop. The agent is given a goal, the model reasons about the next step, it emits an action (a tool call), the environment runs that action and returns a result, and the result is fed back into the model's context for the next turn. This interleaving of reasoning and acting β€” popularized as ReAct β€” is what lets the model course-correct: it can react to what a tool actually returned instead of committing to a plan blindly. The loop ends when the model decides the goal is met and emits a final answer.\n\nTool use and function calling are how an agent touches the world. The model itself only generates text, so it "acts" by emitting a structured call β€” typically JSON naming a tool and its arguments. A surrounding harness executes that call (running a search, a code snippet, an API request), then returns the output as a new observation. Function calling is the model-side mechanism; tool use is the general capability. Standards like the Model Context Protocol (MCP) now aim to make these tool interfaces portable across models and applications.\n\nMemory and planning separate a toy from a workhorse. Short-term memory is the context window itself β€” a scratchpad of the conversation and recent observations β€” while long-term memory offloads facts to an external store (often a vector database) that the agent retrieves from as needed. Planning adds structure on top of the raw loop: decomposing a big goal into subtasks, reflecting on failures, and retrying. More capable agents plan, criticize their own work, and sometimes delegate subtasks to specialized sub-agents in a multi-agent setup.\n\nAutonomy is a spectrum, and more is not always better. At one end is a single tool call inside an otherwise normal chat; in the middle is a fixed multi-step workflow; at the far end is a self-directed agent that decides its own steps until done. Greater autonomy unlocks harder tasks but sacrifices predictability and control, which is why side-effecting actions (sending email, spending money, changing files) are usually gated behind confirmation or guardrails.\n\nThe hard problems are reliability, cost, and safety. Errors compound over long horizons β€” a wrong step early can derail everything after it β€” and every turn is another LLM call, so agents are slower and more expensive than a single response. Tools fail, environments change, and evaluating open-ended agent behavior is genuinely hard. Much of real-world agent engineering is about constraining the loop: good tools, retries, verification steps, human approval for risky actions, and tight scoping of what the agent is allowed to do.\n\n| Piece | Role | Failure mode it guards against |\n|---|---|---|\n| Reason/plan step | choose the next action | aimless or redundant work |\n| Tool call (function calling) | act on the world | hallucinating instead of checking |\n| Observation | feed results back in | acting on stale assumptions |\n| Memory (short + long) | carry context across steps | forgetting earlier findings |\n| Guardrails / approval | gate risky actions | irreversible mistakes |\n\nRead agents through an action-loop lens rather than a smarter-chatbot lens: the leap is not that the model knows more, but that it is placed inside a loop where it can decide what to do next, do it with a real tool, and react to the outcome. Capability then comes as much from the tools, memory, and control structure around the model as from the model itself β€” which is why building a good agent is mostly about engineering a reliable loop, not just prompting a smarter one.\n

agentic ragrag

Explore 500+ Semiconductor & AI Topics

From EUV lithography to CUDA optimization β€” search the full knowledge base or chat with our AI assistant.