Enable agents to improve on their own by scheduling a recurring 'self-review' process. The agent analyzes the results of its past work (e.g., social media engagement on posts it drafted), identifies what went wrong, and automatically updates its own instructions to enhance future performance.

As you manage a fleet of agents, you cannot manually review every output. Platforms like HyperAgent use "Rubrics"—an evaluation framework where one LLM judges another's work against predefined criteria. This automates quality control, which is essential for scaling an agent-first business.

To overcome the challenge of reviewing AI-generated code, have different LLMs like Claude and Codex review the code. Then, use a "peer review" prompt that forces the primary LLM to defend its choices or fix the issues raised by its "peers." This adversarial process catches more bugs and improves overall code quality.

Move beyond manual agent improvement by creating an automated loop. In this process, an agent runs, its performance is evaluated, failures are identified, and another process suggests and implements code fixes. This creates a foundation for self-improving systems.

Notion treats its entire evaluation process as a coding agent problem. The system is designed for an agent to download a dataset, run an eval, identify a failure, debug the issue, and implement a fix, all within an automated loop. This turns quality assurance into a meta-problem for agents to solve.

To improve the quality and accuracy of an AI agent's output, spawn multiple sub-agents with competing or adversarial roles. For example, a code review agent finds bugs, while several "auditor" agents check for false positives, resulting in a more reliable final analysis.

As AI agents generate vast amounts of output, human review becomes an impossible bottleneck. The solution emerging is multi-agent systems where a separate 'grading agent' automatically scores and requests revisions on an agent's work against a predefined rubric, as seen in Anthropic's 'Outcomes' feature, enabling scalable quality assurance.

Don't just automate tasks; automate quality control. Create an agent that reviews a core part of your app daily, grades it against a rubric you define, and automatically spins up a new "child" agent to fix anything that scores below a certain threshold, creating a virtuous cycle of improvement.

Traditional evals fall short for sophisticated agents. A more effective method is a built-in evaluation loop where one agent is tasked with grading the output of another. This allows for continuous, automated quality assessment, especially when done in separate context windows to avoid bias.