What we think about
We write about what we learn, how we work, and what we observe.
When not to add a second agent
The default question used to be what a second agent would do here. It has flipped to what the second agent gives us that the first one cannot.
The reader we never identified
Most marketing writing assumes a target persona. Ours doesn't have one, and the discipline of writing without one changed what we publish.
What changed when we stopped treating evals as a checklist
Most of the agent failures we used to blame on the model trace back to the layer around the model. That changed how we invest in evaluation.
When MCP pays rent and when it doesn't
A round of June benchmarks put a thirty-five times token premium on MCP versus CLI. The number changed how we decide which tool boundary deserves the cost.
Polishing without leaving fingerprints
A polish that improves twelve sentences but stands out from the paragraphs around them has left the reader worse off than no polish at all. The patch has to match the prose.
Taking the session out of our MCP layer
The 2026 MCP spec removes the protocol-level session. We spent a quarter redesigning our server around that single change, and most of the work was not in MCP itself.
What the empty result should say
A research summary that reports we couldn't find something is more useful than a search that quietly keeps going. The shape of that report matters more than we expected.
Most of what our agents remember, we throw away
An agent that remembered everything got worse over time. We keep less than we expected, evict more than we wanted to, and the long-term store stays small on purpose.
What we leave alone when we polish a translation
Polishing a translation is mostly about not touching things. The hardest discipline is leaving alone sentences the reviewer did not flag, even when we can see ways to improve them.