ADIAS: Automated Design of Interactive Agentic Systems
Source
Lekang Jiang, Bohan Tang, Stephan Goetz, Yiwen Guo
Author
Lekang Jiang, Bohan Tang, Stephan Goetz, Yiwen Guo
Published
Terms in this piece · Glossary
AI agent — An AI system that doesn't just answer once but works toward a goal in a loop — taking actions, reading the results, and deciding what to do next.
eval — A repeatable test for AI quality — a set of tasks plus scoring — used the way software teams use test suites, because model output is too variable to judge by eyeballing.
Why it matters
If you run iterative AI agentAn AI system that doesn't just answer once but works toward a goal in a loop — taking actions, reading the results, and deciding what to do next.Full definition →-improvement loops, tracking issues as durable objects rather than re-summarizing candidate history is a concrete change with measured effect.
Transcript
Automated agent design improves agent harnesses through iterative revision, evaluation, and feedback summarization. Existing methods are largely candidate-centric: cross-round experience is organized around candidate agents, which leaves the repair progress implicit. This causes inefficient repair targeting, slow consolidation of partial progress, and propagation of ineffective interventions across rounds. Therefore, we formulate issue-centric agent optimization, in which repair progress is carried forward as an explicit persistent issue state to guide optimization, rather than re-derived from candidate history in each round. We instantiate the formulation in ADIAS, a framework for automated full-code agent design with two mechanisms. A persistent issue state maintains stable issue identities, lifecycle status, supporting evidence, and intervention-outcome histories. Issue-guided optimization uses this state to jointly propose repair targets and revision directions for subsequent focused full-code modification. Across five interactive benchmarks, ADIAS outperforms the strongest baseline by 25.2% on average and achieves consistent gains across four backbone models. Controlled ablations further show that removing persistent issue state or replacing issue-centric revision with candidate-centric policies leads to performance drops of up to 40.7%.