Skip to content

Conversation

geoand
Copy link
Collaborator

@geoand geoand commented Sep 2, 2025

This is based on the upstream langchain4j-agentic and is intentionally bare-bones for now

@geoand geoand requested a review from a team as a code owner September 2, 2025 07:15
@geoand geoand requested a review from mariofusco September 2, 2025 07:15

This comment has been minimized.

@iocanel iocanel self-requested a review September 2, 2025 09:27
Copy link
Collaborator

@iocanel iocanel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

I do have a questio though! Do we really need the @Agent annotation ?
It seems to me that we could just use Tool unless of course we want a Service to act as an agent but not really as a Tool.

@geoand
Copy link
Collaborator Author

geoand commented Sep 2, 2025

Thanks for checking!

We had a lot of back and forth over the summer with @mariofusco and @cescoffier over points like this and we hope to distill all that information in our upcoming Devoxx talks :)

geoand and others added 2 commits September 2, 2025 13:07
This is based on the upstream `langchain4j-agentic`
and is intentionally bare-bones for now

Co-authored-by: mariofusco <[email protected]>
Copy link

quarkus-bot bot commented Sep 2, 2025

Status for workflow Build (on pull request)

This is the status report for running Build (on pull request) on commit 8f40412.

✅ The latest workflow run for the pull request has completed successfully.

It should be safe to merge provided you have a look at the other checks in the summary.

@geoand geoand merged commit a911ede into main Sep 2, 2025
80 checks passed
@geoand geoand deleted the agentic-extension branch September 2, 2025 10:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants