Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

AI Agent Semantic Convention #1732

Open
gyliu513 opened this issue Jan 9, 2025 · 3 comments
Open

AI Agent Semantic Convention #1732

gyliu513 opened this issue Jan 9, 2025 · 3 comments
Labels
area:gen-ai enhancement New feature or request experts needed This issue or pull request is outside an area where general approvers feel they can approve

Comments

@gyliu513
Copy link
Member

gyliu513 commented Jan 9, 2025

Area(s)

area:gen-ai

Is your change request related to a problem? Please describe.

Based on the white paper from Google from google https://www.kaggle.com/whitepaper-agents , we need semantic convention for a SINGLE AI Agent, the SINGLE AI Agent will be composed by LLM and Tools, and Tools will contain DataStore, Functions, Extensions

/cc @lmolkova

Describe the solution you'd like

A new semantic convention for ai agent

Describe alternatives you've considered

No response

Additional context

No response

@TaoChenOSU
Copy link
Contributor

Thank @gyliu513 for creating this issue to continue our discussion from the WG call.

When we invoke an agent to perform a task, the agent invokes the LLM one or more times and can potentially run tools that are available to it. We could reuse the existing gen_ai convention for the LLM calls. I am not sure if a convention for tool will be necessary since tools can take on different forms, such as a code executor, an external service call, and data retrieval, etc. Each of the type should have its own conventions instead and some of them already exist. For example, data retrieval should follow the (vector) database convention.

I do agree we need to capture information about an agent, including id, name, instruction, and different settings.

@joaopgrassi
Copy link
Member

@gyliu513 @TaoChenOSU any of you will be taking this? Given it is already part of the GenAI project, I removed the "needs triage" label but would be good to get it assigned to someone from the SIG.

@gyliu513
Copy link
Member Author

@joaopgrassi I was working for the PR, hope I can have a draft next week, thanks

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:gen-ai enhancement New feature or request experts needed This issue or pull request is outside an area where general approvers feel they can approve
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants