-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
Choose Engine
KinetAios ships three generations of the built-in Kaios engine, switchable per session. All three run the same model with the same tools — what differs is how they work. Picking the right one can easily halve the time a task takes.
| Your task | Pick |
|---|---|
| Q&A, translation, writing, reading a file, fixing one file | V1 |
| Tight cost control, want to see every step | V1 |
| Multi-file code changes, refactors with verification, multi-step data processing | V2 |
| Data analysis, reports, cross-table comparisons | V3 |
| Not sure | V3 (it grades the task difficulty itself) |
How it works: a single-threaded ReAct loop; the model calls tools directly, every step visible in real time. Lightweight context strategy — fastest responses, lowest token cost.
Good for:
- Q&A, explanations, translation, copywriting, emails
- Reading a file, inspecting code, small fixes
- Continuous one-question-one-answer conversations
- Precise control over cost and flow
Not good for:
- Refactors spanning many files (long conversations drop earlier findings)
- Multi-step data processing (intermediate results live in conversation memory and get truncated)
Tip: when using V1 for data analysis, invoke /data-analysis to load the analysis discipline — it measurably reduces "mental-math" errors.
How it works: complex tasks enter a planning phase first (read-only exploration producing a step plan), then execute step by step, each step optionally carrying a verification command (typecheck / tests). Failures auto-retry (≤3 per step, ≤2 replans).
Good for:
- Multi-file code changes and refactors
- Dev tasks that must pass tests/lint after the change
- Multi-step data processing, cross-file stats (intermediate results are forced to disk/memory, truncation-proof)
- Tasks where you want to see the plan before execution starts
Not good for:
- Simple Q&A, single-file tweaks (planning is wasted overhead — slower and pricier)
- Large multi-file parallel work (V2 executes serially, step by step)
Tip: V2 auto-degrades to plain mode on trivial tasks — no "nuking mosquitoes" worry. But if you already know the task is simple, V1 is faster.
How it works: a zero-cost rules-based router grades the task and picks one of three paths:
- fast: reading files, docs, simple Q&A → single-round direct answer, zero overhead
- std: bugfix, feature work, data analysis → multi-round tool execution
- deep: cross-file refactors, architecture-level changes → auto-planned into a DAG; independent steps run in parallel, with built-in verification gates
Good for:
- Data analysis / reports / statistics — V3 has the analysis discipline built in: schema before conclusions, compute via python/sqlite (never mental math), intermediate results on disk, conclusions must be sourced, key numbers cross-checked. When 「📊 Analysis mode」 shows in the status bar, it's active
- Tasks with unknown complexity (let the router decide)
- Complex refactors (deep's parallelism + verification gates are unique among the three)
Not good for:
- Advanced workflows needing precise per-step control (V1 is more transparent)
- Minimum-cost single Q&A at all costs (the fast path is cheap, but V1 is slightly cheaper)
| Scenario | Pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| "Look at this error for me" | V1 or V3 | Single-point problem, just be fast |
| "Move this feature from file A to B, run the tests after" | V2 or V3 | Code change with verification needs |
| "Compare these two CSVs and produce a report" | V3 | Analysis discipline + intermediate results on disk |
| "Migrate the whole project from JS to TS" | V3 (deep) | The only one with DAG parallelism + verification gates |
| "Translate this paragraph" | V1 | No tool orchestration needed |
| "Give me a plan first, I'll approve before you act" | V2 | The planning phase is literally "plan first" |
- Switching engines clears cross-engine context: the three engines' history formats are incompatible — don't switch mid-task
- All three share the same model config, MCP tools, and memory system — switching needs no reconfiguration
- When data files (csv/xlsx/db) appear in the task description, V3 enters analysis mode automatically; on V1, pair it with
/data-analysis