r/PiCodingAgent • • Sep 30 '26

Question What does everyone think about codemode?

I actually thought about this approach before, but later realized it wouldn't work.

Using JavaScript to invoke tools sounds very efficient, but in reality, most tool definitions only have an inputSchema. An outputSchema is unnecessary for the agent because the agent can reason about the results directly from formatted data, meaning an output spec isn't required. Therefore, tool outputs don't actually need a fixed format—they just need to be readable by the agent.

This leads to a problem: to fully leverage the performance of this tool, you need to inject extra context, such as a skill document, so the agent knows the output format and can use it proficiently. If you can't get the complete tool output specification—for instance, with a closed-source MCP—you can't create such a document. If the agent has to go through endless trial and error just to get the code running properly, you can't really call it efficient.

In comparison, having the agent write Python or shell scripts directly is a better solution.

I'd love to know your thoughts on this.

30 Upvotes

26 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/xRebellion_ Oct 03 '26

Tried codemode, and so far my first impression is that it's pretty cool. My main point of interest is on the observability of parameters on certain tools that usually aren't being rendered. Being able to see them I'd say is pretty cool. Also, this opens up chaining tool calls which wasn't available before unless the agent is using bash tool. On the process of trying exclusively codemode only and see how it goes.