@claude review this PR

Claude finished @itomek's task —— View job

PR #216 Review Complete

Status: 🟢 Approve with minor suggestions

Summary

This PR correctly implements SIMPLE_TOOLS support for the Hardware Advisor Agent, eliminating unnecessary "No plan found" warnings for simple queries like "show me my system specs".

What's Good

Copilot Review Comments - Clarification

Several Copilot comments are based on incorrect assumptions:

1. tests/test_chat_agent.py and tests/test_blender_agent.py - These files are NOT modified by this PR. The existing tests are unchanged.

2. ChatAgent SIMPLE_TOOLS with write_file/run_shell_command - This is a pre-existing design in src/gaia/agents/chat/agent.py:82-96, not introduced by this PR.

3. BlenderAgent silent_mode - Not relevant to this PR's test files.

Minor Suggestion

In tests/integration/test_simple_tools_integration.py, some agent variables are created only to register tools. Consider using _agent prefix to indicate intentional non-use (e.g., _agent = QuickInfoAgent()).

Recommendation

Merge when CI passes. The implementation is correct and solves issue #210.

@claude review my comments. Also answer why do we need to differentiate with SIMPLE_TOOLS? This seems like an over-engineered solution. Cant' we solve this with careful prompt optimization and tweaking the warnings? Why not just disable the warning if the agent figures out it's just a single step to execute the tool?

Claude finished @kovtcharov's task —— View job

Reviewing Comments and SIMPLE_TOOLS Architecture

• Read the PR diff and changed files
• Review @kovtcharov's comments
• Analyze whether SIMPLE_TOOLS is necessary vs prompt optimization
• Provide comprehensive response

Response to @kovtcharov's Question: Is SIMPLE_TOOLS Over-Engineered?

Short answer: Yes, this could be solved more elegantly.

The Current Problem

When an agent calls a tool in step 1 without first creating a plan, the warning appears at src/gaia/agents/base/agent.py:2160:

warning_msg = f"No plan found in step {step} response. The agent should create a plan for all tasks."

Why SIMPLE_TOOLS Is Over-Engineered

You're right that the LLM can figure this out. The issue is:

1. The system prompt tells the agent to create plans (lines 178-188) but doesn't explain when to skip planning
2. The warning logic is too strict - it expects a plan for ANY tool call in step 1

Alternative Solutions (Simpler)

Option 1: Prompt Optimization - Add to system prompt:

For simple information retrieval (like status checks or listing data), 
you may call the tool directly without a plan.

Option 2: Disable Warning for Single-Tool Responses - In _validate_plan_required():

# If response contains only one tool call, allow it without a plan
if "tool" in parsed and "plan" not in parsed and step == 1:
    # Single tool call - no plan needed
    return

Option 3: Use @simple_tool Decorator (Your suggestion) - More Pythonic:

@simple_tool  # Marks tool for direct execution
def get_hardware_info() -> dict:
    ...

Recommendation

I agree with @kovtcharov's assessment:

1. Option 2 (disable warning for single-tool step-1 responses) is the simplest fix
2. If explicit marking is needed, Option 3 (@simple_tool decorator) is cleaner than a class attribute list
3. The current PR's SIMPLE_TOOLS = [...] list approach requires manual sync between tool registration and the list

Review of @kovtcharov's Specific Comments

My Recommendation

Request changes to the PR author:

1. Consider alternative approach: Modify _validate_plan_required() to allow single-tool calls without a plan (no explicit marking needed)
2. If explicit marking is required: Implement @simple_tool decorator instead of class attribute list
3. Reduce documentation verbosity: Address the specific comments about removing redundant examples

The simplest fix might be a 3-line change to _validate_plan_required() rather than 1000+ lines of new code.

--- | Branch: 210-hardware-advisor-agent-playbook-warning-message

@claude please review

Claude finished @itomek's task —— View job

PR #216 Review Complete

• Read PR diff and changed files
• Analyze the refactored implementation
• Review @kovtcharov's feedback and previous discussion
• Provide comprehensive review

Status: 🟢 Approve

Summary

This PR has been significantly improved by implementing @kovtcharov's feedback. The SIMPLE_TOOLS class attribute approach has been replaced with a cleaner @tool(atomic=True) decorator pattern, which follows established GAIA conventions.

Key Changes

What's Good

1. Clean decorator pattern - @tool(atomic=True) at src/gaia/agents/base/tools.py:19-24 follows existing @tool conventions
2. Removed over-engineering - The 45-line _validate_plan_required() method was removed; replaced with simple get_atomic_tools() at src/gaia/agents/base/agent.py:2126-2137
3. Consistent across agents - BlenderAgent, ChatAgent, and Hardware Advisor Agent all use the same pattern
4. Self-documenting - Tool behavior is declared at the tool definition site, not in a separate list
5. Tests focused - Tests verify actual tool functionality, not just list membership

Minor Observations

1. get_atomic_tools() method unused - The new method at agent.py:2126-2137 is defined but not called anywhere in the codebase. Consider:

   • Removing it if not needed
   • Or documenting its intended use case

2. Documentation updates - The docs/spec/*.mdx files were updated to remove SIMPLE_TOOLS references, but no documentation was added explaining the @tool(atomic=True) pattern. Consider adding this to docs/sdk/core/tools.mdx.

3. Test coverage - The new test file (tests/test_hardware_advisor_agent.py) focuses on tool functionality but doesn't test the atomic=True metadata registration.

Recommendation

Merge when CI passes. The refactored implementation addresses @kovtcharov's feedback and follows GAIA's established decorator patterns.

--- | Branch: 210-hardware-advisor-agent-playbook-warning-message

@claude review this please

Claude finished @itomek's task —— View job

PR #216 Review

• Read PR diff and changed files
• Analyze the @tool(atomic=True) implementation
• Review test coverage
• Check documentation updates
• Provide comprehensive review

Status: 🟢 Approve

Summary

This PR has been refactored well based on @kovtcharov's feedback. The SIMPLE_TOOLS class attribute list approach has been replaced with a cleaner @tool(atomic=True) decorator pattern, which follows GAIA's established conventions and is more Pythonic.

Key Changes

What's Good

1. Clean decorator pattern - @tool(atomic=True) at src/gaia/agents/base/tools.py:19-24 follows the existing @tool convention elegantly

2. Self-documenting - Tool behavior is declared at the tool definition site, not in a separate list that must be kept in sync

3. Removed complexity - The 45-line _validate_plan_required() method was removed from agent.py:2132-2177, simplifying the base Agent

4. Consistent across agents - All agents now use the same pattern:

   • examples/hardware_advisor_agent.py:124,174,217 - Hardware Advisor tools
   • src/gaia/agents/blender/agent.py:169,408 - BlenderAgent tools
   • src/gaia/agents/chat/tools/rag_tools.py - RAG tools (7 tools marked atomic)
   • src/gaia/agents/chat/tools/shell_tools.py:105 - Shell tools
   • src/gaia/agents/tools/file_tools.py - File tools (5 tools marked atomic)

5. Good test coverage - New test file tests/unit/test_tool_decorator.py with 7 tests covering:

   • Basic registration
   • atomic default to False
   • atomic=True flag storage
   • Mixed atomic values across tools
   • Parameter capture
   • Function callability

Minor Observations

Addresses @kovtcharov's Feedback

Recommendation

Merge when CI passes. The refactored implementation is clean, follows established patterns, and addresses all review feedback.

| Branch: 210-hardware-advisor-agent-playbook-warning-message

@claude review the latest updates to this branch.

Claude finished @kovtcharov's task —— View job

PR #216 Review - Latest Updates

• Read PR diff and changed files
• Analyze the @tool(atomic=True) implementation
• Review documentation updates
• Check @kovtcharov's comment about atomic documentation
• Provide comprehensive review

Status: 🟢 Approve (with one action item)

Summary

The PR has been cleanly refactored from the SIMPLE_TOOLS class attribute list to the @tool(atomic=True) decorator pattern. This is a much cleaner approach that follows GAIA's established patterns.

What's Good

🟡 Action Item: @kovtcharov's Comment

"Make sure atomic is described in the documentation / userguide the first time it's mentioned."

The atomic parameter is documented in the API spec (docs/spec/tool-decorator.mdx:79,93-95,194-227) but is NOT in the conceptual guide (docs/sdk/core/tools.mdx).

Recommendation: Add a brief section to docs/sdk/core/tools.mdx explaining when to use @tool(atomic=True):

### Atomic Tools (Direct Execution)

For simple, self-contained operations that don't require multi-step planning:

@tool(atomic=True)
def get_system_info() -> dict:
    """Get current system information."""
    return {"platform": platform.system(), "memory_gb": ...}

Use `atomic=True` for:
- Status/info retrieval (e.g., `get_scene_info`, `rag_status`)
- Simple queries that return immediately
- Read-only operations with no side effects

Files Changed Summary

Recommendation

Merge when the conceptual guide is updated (or create a follow-up issue to add atomic docs to docs/sdk/core/tools.mdx).

| Branch: 210-hardware-advisor-agent-playbook-warning-message