Skip to content

Repository files navigation

Jive

Rethinking the Agentic Loop with System One Models

I have been thinking that the current Agentic Loop design of LLM Call -> Tool Call -> ... has been outdated. The arrival of Jev and other System One models provided us a primitive we desperately needed. We need an agent that can natively think fast and slow. Not have workflows or multi-agent architectures that mimics it.

The agent should be able to do its hard reasoning using the power of modern LLMs, capture an execution graph filled with steps and fast intuitive decisions, and prevent it from making LLM calls for just to "follow through the plan".

The same task as a regular coding agent's linear trace and as a Jive graph trace

Jive replaces "Tool Calls" with "Graph Calls", where each graph is a DAG-based workflow compromising of Tool Calls and Jev Calls. The agent can do bulk evaluation / analysis of datasets, multi-step profiling, repetitive tasks very efficiently with System One decisions sprinkled in between.

Install

curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/merijjeyn/jive/main/install.sh | sh

Benchmark results

Jive, Codex, and Claude Code running the conversation_eval task side by side at 50x playback

Task Agent Time Tool calls LLM calls Jev calls Output tokens Demo
conversation_eval Jive 3m 26s 128 16 50 11,070 video
Codex 29m 33s 59 60 0 20,467
Claude Code 16m 48s 97 98 0 47,899
error_handling_audit Jive 3m 10s 43 10 0 10,656 video
Codex 19m 29s 49 50 0 25,774
Claude Code 5m 08s 53 54 0 42,508
product_matching Jive 3m 03s 299 9 140 8,921 video
Codex 22m 00s 47 48 0 19,742
Claude Code 32m 02s 21 23 0 19,345
search_latency Jive 2m 00s 13 8 0 9,568 video
Codex 9m 00s 17 18 0 12,793
Claude Code 7m 18s 36 37 0 51,356
sembench_movie Jive 1m 47s 255 10 120 6,114 video
Codex 19m 58s 41 42 0 10,334
Claude Code 8m 51s 13 14 0 15,723
slow_trace_search Jive 1m 41s 12 7 0 5,719 video
Codex 6m 00s 10 11 0 8,064
Claude Code 3m 04s 21 22 0 19,253

As you can see, we are much better in terms of speed and token efficiency compared to Codex and Claude Code, even on tasks that doesn't require Jev calls.


It is generally not a good idea to fight against a models training, and there are certain tasks that codex, claude code or your favorite agent is better for. BUT:

  • I argue it is already extremely useful in certain usecases, and surprisingly more efficient with on par quality on most daily tasks of an engineer.
  • There is a direct corrolation with the intelligence index of a model, and how effectively it can utilize jive. As the models get better, and System One Models get better, and we slowly get into the training set, the gap will be undeniable
  • It is a great core to improve e2e latency and cost for a lot of enterprise usecases like customer support, targeted assistants for lawyers, internal analytics agents etc. without compromising on quality.

So screw it, I'm fighting the models training.

Let's welcome "Agent 2.0"

I know its a bold statement. I'm not sure if this is it. But I know its a step in the right direction.

Principles

  • Carrying the torch lit by pi coding agent: Minimal agent scaffold, customizable but great defaults, no MCP, no Agents, etc. clis are enough. See pi.dev
  • Works well with all system one and system two models. Evolves with new model capabilities.
  • Lightweight: Cache efficient, token-efficient agent interfaces, eager execution, low resources, etc.
  • Graphs should remain flexible and as a "higher level programming layer" for the agent, not managing fixed workflows.
  • Always open source and free.

Documentation

License

MIT

About

A terminal coding agent that plans work as executable graphs

Resources

Contributing

Stars

129 stars

Watchers

0 watching

Forks

Releases

Packages

Contributors

Languages