Questions about AI-first engineering, MCP servers, RAG, evals, orchestration, and how I ship production AI workflows.
They replace first drafts and boilerplate, not accountability. I still review architecture, security boundaries, and edge cases. Agents propose; humans approve merges — especially on auth, payments, and data deletion paths.
Project rules, skills, and small eval checks on generated diffs. I also keep a living AGENTS or README section agents read first. When drift shows up in review, I fix the skill — not just the PR.
Fast model for classification and routing, stronger model for synthesis and debugging, specialized model for multimodal ingestion. I pick by step, not by brand loyalty — and log cost per successful task.
Real workflows branch, retry, and pause for humans. LangGraph lets me model those paths explicitly with memory per node instead of hoping one loop improvises correctly. It is easier to debug a graph than a transcript.
Explicit checkpoint nodes with queues. Low-confidence classifications, outbound emails, and financial actions route to review with full context attached. Approvals feed back into logs and become labeled data for the next eval cycle.
Single-step Q&A with retrieval, or straight API glue. If there is no branch and no memory requirement, a FastAPI endpoint with one tool call is simpler to own.
Step logs with inputs, outputs, and tool latency. I replay from the last good node with the same state snapshot. Most stalls are tool timeouts or schema validation failures, not model creativity issues.
n8n wakes the system — webhook, schedule, CRM trigger — then hands off to a Python worker running the graph. n8n owns SaaS glue; LangGraph owns reasoning and tool orchestration.