Add CodeActSWEAgent to remove browsing & github + improvements on agentskills #2105
Conversation
use minimal prompt for codeact;
xingyaoww
changed the title
| def get_in_context_example() -> str: | ||
| return EXAMPLES | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class CodeActAgent(Agent): | ||
| VERSION = '1.5' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Whether should we bump the version 1.6? The prompts keep the same, but change some logic.
| IMPORTANT: Whenever possible, execute the code for the user using <execute_ipython> or <execute_bash> or <execute_browse> instead of providing it. | ||
| """ | ||
|
|
||
| SWE_EXAMPLE = """ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are we use SWE_EXAMPLE any where? Just according to this case, it seems spend lots of token on edit file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. SWE_EXAMPLE is used in the CodeActSWEAgent, which does not use the same ICL for CodeActAgent.
Co-authored-by: Yufan Song <33971064+yufansong@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This use of SWE agent is interesting and, IMHO, most welcome. We just deprecated the original, a replacement like this seems to me like an even better solution for it.
You may also want to see #2103 CC: @li-boxuan
|
|
||
| SYSTEM_SUFFIX = """The assistant's response should be concise. | ||
| The assistant should include ONLY ONE <execute_ipython> or <execute_bash> or <execute_browse> in every one of the responses, unless the assistant is finished with the task or need more input or action from the user in order to proceed. | ||
| IMPORTANT: Whenever possible, execute the code for the user using <execute_ipython> or <execute_bash> or <execute_browse> instead of providing it. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the <execute_browse> relevant?
| IMPORTANT: Whenever possible, execute the code for the user using <execute_ipython> or <execute_bash> or <execute_browse> instead of providing it. | |
| IMPORTANT: Whenever possible, execute the code for the user using <execute_ipython> or <execute_bash> instead of providing it. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch... It is not relevant. But following the same reason above, I have already run a couple of experiments with this prompt - so hoping to keep it as is for now.
How about we start a separate PR to correct these typos, and at the same time bump the CodeActSWEAgent's version from v1.5 to v1.6 for better reproducibility.
| """ | ||
|
|
||
| SYSTEM_SUFFIX = """The assistant's response should be concise. | ||
| The assistant should include ONLY ONE <execute_ipython> or <execute_bash> or <execute_browse> in every one of the responses, unless the assistant is finished with the task or need more input or action from the user in order to proceed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| The assistant should include ONLY ONE <execute_ipython> or <execute_bash> or <execute_browse> in every one of the responses, unless the assistant is finished with the task or need more input or action from the user in order to proceed. | |
| The assistant should include ONLY ONE <execute_ipython> or <execute_bash> in every one of the responses, unless the assistant is finished with the task or needs more input or action from the user in order to proceed. |
| return f'{action.thought}\n<execute_bash>\n{action.command}\n</execute_bash>' | ||
| elif isinstance(action, IPythonRunCellAction): | ||
| return f'{action.thought}\n<execute_ipython>\n{action.code}\n</execute_ipython>' | ||
| elif isinstance(action, BrowseInteractiveAction): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I understand correctly the BrowseInteractiveAction should be remove, is this the case or I simply misunderstood?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In my understanding, this agent, CodeAct-SWE, is supposed to know how to browse and use github. It takes over those responsibilities, 'freeing' CodeAct.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yep. I think this should be removed. CodeActSWE does not have the ability to browse.
Good catch... It is not relevant. But following the same reason above, I have already run a couple of experiments with this prompt - so hoping to keep it as is for now.
How about we start a separate PR to correct these typos, and at the same time bump the CodeActSWEAgent's version from v1.5 to v1.6 for better reproducibility.
^ For this reason, how about we starts a separate PR once this is merged to correct all these issues and bump the version?
| len(message['content']) for message in messages | ||
| ) + len(action_str) | ||
|
|
||
| if finish_command := re.search(r'<finish>.*</finish>', action_str, re.DOTALL): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this finish block in use? I cannot see instructions for the model to use <finish>...</finish>.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nope! Let's remove it
|
Integration test captures a regression for CodeActAgent:
UPDATE: I found the culprit. Looking into fixing it... |
|
@xingyaoww Looks like this is ready to go once conflicts are cleared. |
|
I spoke to Xingyao and we decided to merge it. |
No description provided.