> Basically, try to keep the content in these files to an absolute minimum focusing on information that cannot be inferred/discovered, one-line code patterns, disallowed behaviours, links to guides.
Absolutely. And as usual.. PRs are welcome :) On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 10:40 AM Nathan Hadfield <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > On the topic of CLAUDE/AGENTS.md files, there was a rather interesting > paper published recently about their effectiveness. > > https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.11988 > > The TD;LR is > > > * > LLM-generated context files reduce success rates (0.5-2%) while increasing > inference cost by 20-23% > * > Developer-written files help slightly (+4%), but verbose content that > duplicates existing docs is pure cost > * > Codebase overviews don't improve navigation: agents find relevant files in > the same number of steps regardless > > Basically, try to keep the content in these files to an absolute minimum > focusing on information that cannot be inferred/discovered, one-line code > patterns, disallowed behaviours, links to guides. > > Hope this helps. > > Cheers, > > Nathan > > From: Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > Date: Monday, 2 March 2026 at 09:29 > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Active approach to fighting with AI slop (while > keeping maintainers in the driving seat) > > This Message Is From an External Sender > This message came from outside your organization. > > > Also: I am thinking of more tools like that - especially one that will > allow us to auto-triage issues and use an LLM to speed up issue > classification for provider releases (once suggested by Shahar I think) and > many more things. > > The quality of good models is amazing. I am literally stunned by what > Claude Code can do today - I tried it few months ago and the difference is > night and day. I literally entirely Claude-Coded the whole thing > without writing a single line of code myself. > > And since we have at the very least 6 months of free Claude Code Max for > maintainers of big OSS projects > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://claude.com/contact-sales/claude-for-oss__;!!Ci6f514n9QsL8ck!mS8qTovb9go2kfJwcUGGry6yWpOOcdvB2IXJYYHcOEam-B2gTQQ_dcYm19lzIlgAKCiUragw0XqPXOJZ$ > as of 3 days (liteally day > after I paid for my first month)!!!) - Airflow definitely qualifies, so all > core maintainers can get it regardless if their employees already pay them > for it. So if you have not done it yet - apply :D. > > J. > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 10:22 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > maybe we should use the new LLMOperator form common.ai as an option > > (hehe)! > > Just joking, of course. > > > > Crossed my mind :D > > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 10:20 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> This is really cool, Jarek. Thanks for sharing. A tool like this is > >> definitely necessary given the current volume of AI slope and PRs being > >> submitted without proper context. > >> > >> maybe we should use the new LLMOperator form common.ai as an option > >> (hehe)! > >> Just joking, of course. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Pavan > >> > >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 9:17 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > I think that we could later automate at least the dry-run execution > of > >> > the > >> > script, along with Slack notification for highly-suspected issues/PRs. > >> > Then, it would be easier for maintainers to react fast when needed. > >> > > >> > Yes. I would like to run it manually—ideally with several volunteer > >> > maintainers - for a while to see how it works, improve and iterate and > >> > possibly add more quality gates. When we have more confidence we could > >> run > >> > it automatically for some parts or even the whole process eventually > >> > (especially for high-confidence/sensitive stuff), keeping the > sensitive > >> > parts with Human-In-The-Loop. > >> > > >> > But also (and this is my hope) - similarly to `breeze ci upgrade` it > >> might > >> > turn out that the process is so efficient and "nice" to follow that we > >> > could continue trigger it manually, regularly, perhaps with a > rotational > >> > maintainer handling the triage. I think comments and actions coming > >> from a > >> > human maintainer have more value than those from a bot—even if the > human > >> > action is merely confirming what an automated system or LLM proposed. > >> > > >> > J. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 10:04 AM Shahar Epstein <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Amazing stuff Jarek! > >> > > I think that we could later automate at least the dry-run execution > of > >> > the > >> > > script, along with Slack notification for highly-suspected > issues/PRs. > >> > > Then, it would be easier for maintainers to react fast when needed. > >> > > > >> > > Looking forward for new AI-based features in breeze in particular, > and > >> > > Airflow in general :) > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Shahar > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 04:59 Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hello everyone, > >> > > > > >> > > > While preparing for consensus on the assignment policy, I created > PR > >> > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/62585__;!!Ci6f514n9QsL8ck!mS8qTovb9go2kfJwcUGGry6yWpOOcdvB2IXJYYHcOEam-B2gTQQ_dcYm19lzIlgAKCiUragw0bHQEs-s$. > This PR adds a new > >> > command > >> > > > to > >> > > > Breeze, `breeze issues unassign`, which unassigns anyone who is > not > >> a > >> > > > committer or collaborator. > >> > > > > >> > > > I want this to be the first of several Breeze commands I plan to > >> add to > >> > > > help manage the AI overhead and burden on maintainers. > >> > > > > >> > > > I got inspired bu Hugo van Kamerade's (my friend, Python release > >> > manager) > >> > > > tool > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://hugovk.dev/blog/2026/gh-triage/__;!!Ci6f514n9QsL8ck!mS8qTovb9go2kfJwcUGGry6yWpOOcdvB2IXJYYHcOEam-B2gTQQ_dcYm19lzIlgAKCiUragw0TLnNyxs$. > He added the `gh` > >> > plugin > >> > > > that helps him manage spam coming to Python. I hope we can have > very > >> > > > similar set of commands and regular process of performing cleanup > >> with > >> > > the > >> > > > issues/prs we are getting. > >> > > > > >> > > > BTW. I am using Claude Code to add those commands (so this is a > bit > >> > like > >> > > > using AI to fight AI slop). But in a smart way. > >> > > > > >> > > > In our case we have `breeze` that we are already using for `ci > >> upgrade` > >> > > by > >> > > > maintainers and I see no reason why we could not use our own CLI > to > >> > make > >> > > us > >> > > > far more efficient with assessing and quickly and efficiently > >> > processing > >> > > > incoming spam. > >> > > > > >> > > > Starting with AGENTS.md that describes what we expect (and > instructs > >> > > agents > >> > > > to make good PRs) and changing our assignment process - I think we > >> > should > >> > > > proceed to implement step-by-step handling of the incoming > traffic: > >> > > > > >> > > > a) Quickly assess how well PRs implement our expectations, point > out > >> > > > problems, and close them > >> > > > > >> > > > b) automatically telling the collaborators what is wrong with > their > >> PRs > >> > > if > >> > > > they are incomplete (for example when tests are failing, or when > >> they > >> > > need > >> > > > a rebase) > >> > > > > >> > > > c) automatically responding to issues that they are incomplete and > >> need > >> > > > more information > >> > > > > >> > > > d) Allow filtering by area (so that maintainers focusing on a > >> > particular > >> > > > area can periodically review only the areas they are intereste > >> > > > e) all that with some AI assistance (I plan to imlpement > integration > >> > with > >> > > > some modern AI LLMs so that it is seamless for those maintainers > who > >> > > > already use some of those (including Cloud Code, GH Copilot > >> > (maintainers > >> > > > can apply for free access there), Codex and any models someone > >> prefers > >> > - > >> > > > including local models). > >> > > > > >> > > > f) all that with maintainer in the driver's seat—we won't do those > >> > things > >> > > > fully automatically - but we will get reviewable action proposal > in > >> > bulk > >> > > > that the maintainer will be able to accept, modify or reject. > >> > > > > >> > > > .... more... > >> > > > > >> > > > All that will be open to contribution and I will be happy to > leading > >> > > > introduction and disseminating those CLI options between > >> maintainers to > >> > > > make sure those get incorporated in our daily work - relieving > some > >> of > >> > > the > >> > > > burden we are all experiencing and sharing it between people. > >> > > > > >> > > > I think this is a viable approach to address our current burden > >> > > > proactively, rather than waiting for others to act. > >> > > > > >> > > > This is also somewhat experimental since we haven't seen it done > >> > before, > >> > > so > >> > > > suggestions, comments, ideas and PRs that could help us become > more > >> > > > efficient and better maintainers are most welcome. > >> > > > > >> > > > Let me know what you think. > >> > > > > >> > > > J. > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >
