从能力到可靠性:克服智能体工作流的“缝隙裂痕”
在过去的一年里,AI 智能体领域取得了显著的进展。一年前,行业面临的棘手难题还是如何让智能体在从未见过的屏幕上找到一个按钮并点击它;而到了今天,智能体(Agent: 能自主感知环境、进行决策并执行任务的 AI 系统)不仅能驱动浏览器,甚至开始驱动桌面应用程序。然而,点击按钮和滚动屏幕只是最简单的第一步,真正的挑战在于如何让智能体完成实际的工作。
在实际的企业场景中,很多端到端的工作流是极其琐碎且跨系统的。例如,当一名新员工在周一入职时,我们需要为他配置账号、加入 Slack 频道、预约与同事的介绍会、订购笔记本电脑等。这一整套端到端的过程在公司内部往往没有单一的负责人,且需要横跨五个不同的系统。尽管当今的智能体几乎可以可靠地执行其中任何一个单一的步骤,但它们在面对完整的端到端工作流时依然表现挣扎。这是因为真实的工作往往存在于各种应用程序以及执行步骤之间的缝隙(seams)中。这正是系统容易崩溃的地方——智能体可以使用你给它的每一个工具,却依旧无法完成全部的工作。
这暴露出能力与可靠性之间的巨大鸿沟。目前,行业已经基本掌握了如何为模型增加工具使用等能力,但接下来的难关是可靠性(Reliability: 系统在规定条件下和规定时间内完成规定功能的能力)。没有可靠性,我们就无法建立对这些系统的信任。如果我们在脑海中对智能体执行端到端工作流的成功率做一个评估,现阶段或许只能达到 60% 到 80%。这听起来似乎还不错,但如果将其应用 to 实际生产中,一旦智能体在四次操作中有一次误删了数据库,用户就永远不会再碰这个智能体了。因此,为了建立真正的信任,我们必须追求极致的可靠性。
在软件开发领域,AI 的可靠性和信任度已经实现了跨越式发展,从最初的代码自动补全,到编写函数,再到如今编码智能体(Coding Agent: 能够自主编写代码、提交 Pull Request 并进行迭代的系统)自主生成代码并提交拉取请求。之所以编码智能体能首先解决可靠性问题,是因为代码是可验证的。你可以运行它、测试它、校验它,并确信它是否正常工作。然而,对于大多数知识性工作以及纷繁复杂的现实世界而言,情况并非如此。比如,撰写的报告是否达意?设计的视觉风格是否符合品牌调性?智能体是否真正理解了我的意图?这些问题无法通过单元测试(Unit Test: 对软件中的最小可测试单元进行检查和验证的自动化测试)来回答。当无法轻易验证答案时,如何让智能体变得可靠?这依然是一个完全开放的领域。
Original English Source
Joining us on stage is a member of technical staff at Amazon AGI lab onjab. bar. Good morning. It's so great to be back here at the AI Engineer Worlds Fair. Just a year ago, the hard problem was getting an agent to find a button and click it on a screen, especially screens it had never seen before. Now, agents can drive browsers and they're starting to also drive desktop apps. But what we figured out, clicking was actually the easy part. What we didn't solve is the actual work. And what do I mean with this? Let's take a very simple example. A new team member starts on Monday. And maybe your job is to set up their accounts, add them to your Slack channel, book intros with colleagues, order the laptops, etc. And nobody really owns this end to end process in the company and it might be also touching five different systems. Now, agents can most likely perform each single individual step of this workflow, but agents still struggle to do this end to end because the real work lives within the seams of all of those different applications, of all of those different steps you have to take. And this is mostly where it all falls apart. The agent can use every single tool you give it, but it still can't do the full work. So why do we see this gap? Think about for a minute what we actually build. We taught computers to use computers. So what do I mean with this? We started building out the basics. We taught them clicking, scrolling, typing, calling an API, filling out a form, and we got those steps, these steps really reliable, and you can string them together in a workflow. And agents these days are fairly good at like operating those workflows. So, why can't you not just hand them more of your work and then literally just walk away and trust it to be completed? So all the things I talked about like using a tool models itself, tool use, stringing agents together, this is all capabilities and we mostly figured out how to add capabilities to models. Now the next hard problem is really reliability and without reliability we cannot really build up trust in those systems. So here's a quick gut check and maybe all of you can just think about an agent doing work in an end to-end workflow. How often do you think that actually succeeds these days? Maybe 60 maybe 80% of the time. And it sounds really fine, but if you look into this, if your agent one in four times deletes a database, you will never touch that agent again, right? So when you need this reliability, you really need to be it in the nines. You need to have the trust that it actually can do the work successfully. Now there's actually one place where we made enormous progress on reliability and trust and this is coding right. Think about how fast coding evolved. I still remember the first time when it started autocompleting for you, right? You just tapped autocomplete. Amazing. Then short time later, it started to write functions. And we thought that is amazing. And now look at these days. Coding agents write the code. They open up the pull requests themselves. And we had it earlier this week. Code keeps flying by. So once in a time we were able to just every single line that it generated we felt like the urge we need to really read it and make sure it's correct right I think most in the audience here can still relate to that these days I think hardly anyone is still doing that like we cannot even do that right code is generated at such a pace at the same time coding made that jump so why is that because we were able to bring it from just being capable the coding agents to actually be reliable and then trusted. So why is that? Why was coding first solved? It's because code is verifiable. You can run it, you can test it, you can check it and you can be for sure that it worked. So reliability showed up in the first place you can actually verify the answer. But here's the catch. Most of the work we do if you look at the broader knowledge work areas is not like that. Knowledge work is messy and heck the whole real world is really messy. Did the report I created land? Is the design on brand? Did it get it what I actually meant? So there is no unit test that can answer those questions. So verification really hits the wall right where most of our work lives. It's living in the seams of all of those applications we're using on a day-by-day basis. And nobody really has corrected this part yet. How do you make an agent reliable when there's no way to verify the answer that easily? And that's a field that is still wide open.
感知的核心:实时共享上下文与“感知-规划-行动”闭环
为了解决非结构化、不可验证工作中的可靠性难题,我们可以向人类处理复杂工作的方式学习。人类在工作中每天都要跨越不同的系统,比如协同完成新员工的入职。我们之所以能成功,是因为我们懂得协同探索。当我们遇到困难时,会拉上一位同事,加入一个 Zoom 会议,共同看着同一个屏幕进行讨论,指出系统中的问题,两分钟后问题就迎刃而解了。然而,这恰趣是目前的 AI 智能体所缺失的。智能体并不一定需要一个更强大的大脑,它们需要的是共享上下文(Shared Context: 协作者之间共同拥有的背景信息、当前状态和理解)。如果智能体和人类能看着同一个屏幕,人类需要解释的成本就会大大降低。
目前的智能体虽然能够看到屏幕并点击操作,但它们通常在触发一个操作后就立即继续下一步,而不会观察后续发生的变化,也无法在某一步失败或出现偏差时进行自我修复。我们需要让智能体像人类一样工作,这可以借鉴机器人学(Robotics: 研究机器人的设计、制造和应用的学科)的经典逻辑:感知环境、规划行动、执行操作。这种**“感知-规划-行动”(Perceive-Plan-Act)的闭环同样需要应用在屏幕操作中。首先是感知**:智能体必须像人类一样去理解屏幕,而不是仅仅抓取页面背后的代码,它需要感知实际渲染出来的版面、状态以及工作中的实时变化,并跟上人类的操作节奏。
在现有的人机交互模式中,我们发送一个提示词,然后被动等待智能体在后台处理,最后智能体返回结果。由于其返回的内容往往不完全符合我们的预期,我们不得不再次发送提示词进行纠正,从而陷入了冗长的多轮对话。这种轮流交替的节奏构成了目前的聊天机器人体验。但我们真正需要的,是一个能在你工作的同时做出反应的智能体。它能在你操作的同时提出建议、提供帮助,实现零等待的实时协同。这种能够感知你所感知、理解你所表达的智能体,我们称之为感知智能体(Perception Agent: 能够实时感知用户屏幕状态、理解交互上下文并进行协同操作的智能体)。
感知智能体的重要价值体现在三个方面。第一,它完成了计算机使用的闭环。它能够读取渲染后的屏幕,确认自己的输出是否真正起效,而不是盲目地发送操作指令然后寄希望于运气。第二,它不需要 API 或后台进程。因为它直接工作在渲染后的像素界面上,看到的是与人类完全相同的像素和结构,这让它能够无缝兼容那些没有提供 API 的日常软件。第三,它改变了人机交互的输入方式。用户不再需要撰写长篇大论来描述修改需求,而是可以直接在屏幕上指指点点。例如,在网页开发中,你可以直接框选某处并说“修改这个标题”或“更新这个区域”,这种精确的视觉信号相比纯文本输入的损耗要低得多,智能体可以完全基于你的标记精准执行。
Original English Source
So, how can we solve this? Well, so how do do humans handle messy work? I mean, we're successful at it, right? Each of us like every day we work across different systems. We manage out how to onboard a new colleague. We do this. Well, we're doing it by figuring things out together. You grab a colleague, you jump on a Zoom meeting, you're discussing things, you're looking at the problem to solve, you're discussing pointing at systems, and maybe two minutes later, you solved it. You're done. But none of this work is actually directly verifiable. And we do this all day. So one of the things is we're looking mostly at the same screen, right? If you're jumping on a meeting with a colleague, you see the same screen, both of you, and you can actually like figure out really quickly what needs to be done. So this is what the agent these days is missing. You don't necessarily need a bigger brain. What you need is this shared context. Because if we're looking the agent and myself at the same screen, I probably have much less explanating to do. So what kind of agent do we really need to build to achieve this? And today's agent, as I said, they can already see a screen, right? and they can click and take actions in it. That part works. But if they fire off actions, what they usually do, they move on. They don't watch what happens or recover if one step didn't succeed or something goes sideways. And we need an agent that can actually work like you do, like humans work. And one example is robotics. If you just look for a moment as how robotics do it, a robot perceives what's around it and it plans what to do and then acts. So this loop here from perceiving to planning to acting, this is actually what we also would need on a screen. And it starts here really with the first word which is perceive. The agent has to take in the screen the way you do, not scrape the code behind the page, but what's actually rendered, the layout, the state, what just changed the work, what we're doing, and then do it. And it would also have to keep up in real time. Think about how we as humans work together. You jump in, you react to build on top of what each other you say. And today agents can still don't do it. What we're doing is we're sending a prompt. We're waiting. It goes away and at one point the agent come back and we might have to take a couple of turns, right? Because what the agent come back with is not exactly what we might want to do. So we're sending another prompt say, "Hey, go back do this, do this differently." And we have this long back and forth which we got so used to from our chatbot experience and from this rhythm taking turns. But what we actually would need, think about it, is an agent that can react while you're still working. Wouldn't that be really cool, right? Like at the same time you're working, it can also come up with suggestions, can help you, and there is no waiting time. So basically an agent that perceives what you perceive and understands what you mean. We call them perception agents. So why perception agents? Why do they matter? So first they complete the loop on computer use. Today's agents again they can act, they can click, they can type, they can scroll, but what they can't do well is looking at the results and whether it actually worked out. A perception agent can read the rendered screen so it can confirm its own output instead of just firing off those actions and then hoping. Second, it doesn't need an API or backend process. And that's important because it works off the rendered interface. It sees the same pixels and the structure you see. And most of today's software people use every day don't expose APIs at all. And then third, the input also goes the other way here. Instead of writing a long paragraph to describe what you want to change, let's say you're working on a website and you want to describe all the changes you want to apply. Instead of writing this really long description, wouldn't it be great if you can just point to it and say, "Hey, here this heading needs to change. Hey, can you update this section?" This is a much more precise signal and less lossy than text. and the agent can act exactly on what you marked. So this is where we started and I'm happy to share that we just recently launched the first two pieces of our perception agent harness open source. There's two pieces. There is annotation which you can use to tell it what you want.
开源工具链:交互式视觉标注与设计规范自动化校验
为了推动这一技术范式的落地,亚马逊 AGI 实验室最近将感知智能体工具链的首批两个核心组件进行了开源。其中,第一个组件用于人机交互阶段的视觉标注(Annotation),第二个组件则用于智能体自我审查的设计校验(Verification)。首先是视觉标注工具。它被设计成一个 Chrome 浏览器扩展程序,极大降低了使用门槛。在实际操作中,安装了该扩展的用户可以直接在屏幕上框选不同的元素。例如,用户可以通过鼠标拖拽,在网页标题或特定区域画一个红框并标记该部分,用户也可以直接悬停选择某个特定元素并给出修改指令,比如“将字体大小翻倍”或“将这里改成红色”。在这个过程中,标注工具会精准捕获用户在屏幕上的反馈、交互位置以及样式元素,生成一份结构化的修改摘要,并直接将其传递给智能体进行精准实现。这种基于屏幕直观交互的机制消除了传统文本沟通中的反复拉锯。
其次是设计校验工具。在网页开发等场景下,用户可以在一个设计说明文件(如 design.md)中定义好项目的视觉设计规范。校验工具在运行时会读取这些定义好的颜色、组件和布局规则,并对智能体的产出进行两类自动化检查。一是视觉检查(Visual Check: 对界面渲染效果与设计规范一致性进行的像素级比对),以确保所有内容都符合品牌调性并且布局正确。二是用户流检查(User Flow Check: 对用户在软件中完整操作路径进行的模拟测试),智能体会模拟真实用户的交互流程,在应用中添加任务、删除任务。当所有的模拟操作完成后,校验工具会输出一份详细的测试报告,清晰标注哪些测试通过了,哪些地方存在违规。这使得开发者无需在深夜亲自点击测试每一个流程。如果报告指出了违规项,用户可以根据实际情况选择是更新设计规范(比如认可了新的黄色背景),还是让智能体执行修复指令来消除违规。
Original English Source
And then the second piece, the verification part gives the agent the capability to check its own work. So let me show you the first one. So here's a very quick demo on our annotation tool. This one is a Chrome extension, so it's super easy to use. And I'm going to play here this quick video demo. So you have the extension installed and then you can just select different elements on a screen. So this example we're just drawing around the heading there marking the section. And maybe you want to change it. Why not? Let's change it to red. You could also select the elements on this page. You see how if I hover over it it finds the right element. You click it, you select it and say something maybe double the font size. And you see also how the agent here captures on the screen exactly the feedback, the location, the style elements and it creates this complete summary which you can then use and then give your agent to implement. So there is no back and forth anymore because you captured exactly what you saw on screen and the agent can see the same thing. Now let's have a very brief look at the second one at verification. So the idea of verification is that you can describe let's stay in this case of the web development. You can describe in a design MD file what your design rules are for this. And then what happens if I play this video here, the act the agent can actually check its own work against those design specs. So it will take what you defined, the colors, the components, your layout, and it turns it into those rules if you don't have it written before yet. And it does two kinds of checks. Then it does a visual check, which is really cool. So everything is on brand, for example. it's the right layout. The other part is also checking user flows. So what it does there, it actually walks through this experience through the app for example depending on the tasks available. It might add a task, it might delete a task like a real user would. So it helps you walk through those user flows as well in an automated fashion. And then once it's done, it's writing a report which you can review and it's going to call out which tests passed and it's going to tell you anything that didn't. So ultimately, you're the one that doesn't have to click through this at midnight at the end of the day because great work. The agent already did this job for you. Now there might not always be a screen, right? So I talked a lot right now. I called it perception. I talked about the agent sees what you see on a screen. But there are times in your day where you don't have a screen. Maybe you're in the office. You're walking into a meeting with a colleague.
超越屏幕:多模态空间感知与人机协作的未来
感知智能体的概念不仅局限于屏幕像素,它的终极形态是延伸到物理空间,去感知人类所处的真实环境。亚马逊 AGI 实验室在会议期间进行了一项极具前瞻性的多模态感知实验。在实验中,主讲人与同事 Giovanni 前往会议区二楼的一个小型会议室进行设计讨论。他们都佩戴了由 B 公司赞助的 B 智能设备(B Device: 一款能够进行实时语音转录与环境感知的可穿戴智能硬件)。这些设备会在讨论过程中实时倾听两人的对话并生成转录文本。转录生成后,系统会自动提取出详细的会议摘要和核心设计决策,并直接将其展现给用户,用户只需点击“应用”(Apply)按钮即可将其发送给感知智能体。
在演示中,主讲人在口头讨论中提到的“把网页背景变成黄色”、“将标题改为红色”以及“直接更改某处表情符号”等改动点,被智能体瞬间捕捉并直接应用到了目标网站上,且当即触发了设计规范校验。虽然这种怪异的色彩搭配可能会违反某些预设的色彩规范,但用户拥有最终决策权,可以决定是修改设计规范,还是让智能体执行修复指令以消除违规。这次开源的视觉标注与设计校验工具仅仅是感知智能体生态的起点。亚马逊 AGI 实验室选择在 GitHub 上完全开源这些研究,旨在邀请更多的开发者、研究者共同参与,在实际使用中测试、改进甚至“打破”这些工具,因为只有通过群策群力,才能让 AI 更好地服务于人类。
此外,如果对人机交互(HCI)模式的未来变革感兴趣,主讲人推荐了其同事——亚马逊 AGI 实验室认知科学家 Danielle Persik 团队主持的学术播客。该播客深度探讨了专家视角下的人机协同模式演进。同时,亚马逊 AGI 实验室的 Gaurav Mishra 也会在随后的计算机使用专题论坛上带来关于从强化学习(RL)到真实世界(IRL)的专题演讲,欢迎大家前往展区和官方网站继续这一前沿探索。
Original English Source
So I did a fun experiment yesterday at the conference here. So I grabbed my colleague Giovanni who is also here and actually on the second floor there's a great like little meeting booth. We found that by coincidence. So we went in there and we had our design meeting. And the goal here is really kind of show you how perception is so much more than just the visual part. So in this example, what we want to show you is perception can also be listening in the room to what you're discussing. And you can see here on the picture, both of us are wearing our B devices. Big shout out to B for sponsoring these. Um, so we're sitting there. We have our B devices that can do a transcript. They're listening to what we're saying. And then we have this design meeting and I had a couple of great ideas how to change this website. Um, you will see them in a in a second here. So let's have a quick look how this changed the same workflow on this website using this device. So we had the discussion the be did the transcript and you can see here on the right we're pulling this meeting transcript right in there is a whole detailed summary of the meeting. There is what we discussed and then it basically captures those insights. We have them right here and we can click apply. So what this apply button does is it sends it straight to the agent. And you can see here my crazy ideas to turn the background to yellow, turn the heading to red, and also change an emoji directly applied. And it also straight kicks off the verification right away. So it creates this report and luckily this color scheme was apparently into in the approved rules. Otherwise, this would have liked like you did some weird things here. But again, you could change those rules if you don't want to have yellow backgrounds and it will make sure um that we still adhere to those guidelines. It would flag anything that's off. So, you have the judgment call if you want to either update the design specs because you actually like yellow or you take an action and say, "No, um fix this violation." But this is really the very first step. These two pieces are the very first beginning. And we're building out the rest in the open because these patterns can only get better if more people are using them, building on top of them, breaking things. So my ask here to you is go and try them out. They're on our GitHub repos, open source. Tell us what we're missing. give us the feedback what you would like to see where this should go next because ultimately none of us get smart alone and that's the whole point. We want to build AI that makes all of us smarter together. Now, if you're interested in a little bit more on human agent interactions and how we see those patterns changing, I would highly recommend this podcast by my colleague Danielle Persik. She is a cognitive scientist and runs our AGI ACI team at the lab and discusses a lot about human computer interaction patterns with experts in the industry. You can find the podcast on on any popular podcast platform. We also have more sessions this week. Um, so check them out. We have a booth down there. We have expert talks. We also have another computer use track talk coming up with my colleague Gaurav Mishra at 1:30 in the computer use track. Highly recommend checking out his talk from RL to IRL. And then ultimately come find us. We have a huge presence down at the expo hall. We would love to continue the conversation with you all. If you're not here in person, you can also check out our code on our GitHub repo and check out our website. And with that, thank you very much.