标签：#crewai

If you love the multi-agent AI orchestration concepts from Python’s CrewAI, but want the performance, native concurrency, and low memory footprint of Go, check out crewai-go. The v0.4.0 release brings key capabilities to make building multi-agent systems in Go fast, type-safe, and production-ready. ✨ Key Highlights: 🛠️ Custom Tools: Easily create and bind custom tools using tools.NewTool(...). 🔄 Sequential Context Flow: Outputs from previous tasks flow directly into subsequent tasks as context. 📦 Structured Outputs: Map LLM responses straight into native Go structs using standard json:"..." tags. 🏠 Flexible Provider Support: Run fully offline with Ollama or integrate seamlessly with OpenAI. 🧠 Short-Term Memory: Agents keep context across complex task executions. 💡 Quick Example: package main import ( "context" "fmt" "log" "github.com/rhgs/crewai-go/crew" ) func main () { researcher := crew . NewAgent ( crew . AgentConfig { Role : "AI Researcher" , Goal : "Analyze tech trends" , Backstory : "An expert in discovering high-impact open-source Go tools." , }) task := crew . NewTask ( crew . TaskConfig { Description : "Summarize the main benefits of using Go for AI agent orchestration." , ExpectedOutput : "3 concise bullet points." , Agent : researcher , }) c := crew . NewCrew ( crew . CrewConfig { Agents : [] * crew . Agent { researcher }, Tasks : [] * crew . Task { task }, }) result , err := c . Kickoff ( context . Background ()) if err != nil { log . Fatal ( err ) } fmt . Println ( result . Raw ) } 🔗 Release details & GitHub repo: github.com/rhgs/crewai-go/releases/tag/v0.4.0

Approval workflows do not fail only at the model layer. In a production agent, the more common failure is losing the exact paused state that a reviewer was supposed to approve. Why can a saver decide LangGraph approvals? A saver can decide LangGraph approvals because approvals depend on persisted graph state, not just a chat transcript. LangGraph interrupts pause execution inside a node, store the current state, wait until a human decision arrives, and resume the intended checkpoint with Command(resume=...) ; without a saver tied to the same thread_id , the reviewer handoff can resume the wrong point or fail to resume at all . Quick Answer: LangGraph approvals work only when the paused run is checkpointed and resumed through the same thread_id . LangSmith adds the audit layer: each trace is capped at 25,000 runs, and SaaS trace retention is documented as 400 days from ingestion . The practical rule is simple: put the checkpoint before the irreversible action. That means email sends, file writes, deploys, database mutations, support-ticket edits, purchases, payments, outbound messages, and code execution should pause before the side effect. LangChain's HumanInTheLoopMiddleware follows the same shape: inspect tool calls after model output but before execution, then allow an approve, edit, or reject decision against a checkpointed run . "Interrupts are designed to pause graph execution and resume from the saved point," according to the official LangGraph interrupts documentation . For developers, the important part is operational: the approval gate is only trustworthy if the persisted checkpoint and reviewer decision refer to the same run. LangSmith then gives the team evidence that the gate is behaving correctly. Its observability model groups execution into projects, traces, runs, and threads, which lets teams audit latency, rejection reasons, retry count, tool failures, and reviewer decisions instead of debugging from logs alone . The seed video is useful background

A competitor intelligence agent enables real-time pricing visibility, automated positioning tracking, and structured competitor briefs for brands without manual research. At the center of these workflows are a researcher agent responsible for gathering data and an analysis agent responsible for generating a summary and a downstream report. However, one of the things that makes the researcher agent's output trustworthy is its retrieval layer, since a poor retrieval-layer output can make the analysis agent's recommendation questionable. If the researcher agent searches the webpage and retrieves a challenge page, an empty response, or blocked content, every downstream conclusion becomes less trustworthy. With a 99.93% success rate on protected websites, ZenRows provides the reliable retrieval layer that makes these workflows practical in production. This tutorial shows why a CrewAI researcher agent can fail on protected competitor pages. It starts with a custom ZenRows-based tool setup, then later shows the MCP server as an alternative approach. Prerequisites This tutorial works best with Python 3.10 or newer. If you are on an older Python version, create a dedicated virtual environment with a current Python installation to avoid dependency conflicts. Python 3.10 to 3.13. CrewAI requires this range. ZenRows API key. Create an account at zenrows.com and copy your key from the dashboard. This key authenticates every scrape the researcher agent runs for data extraction. Anthropic API key. The crew uses Claude to drive both agents. Generate a key in the Anthropic Console. Install dependencies and the required packages using pip install "crewai[anthropic]" crewai-tools zenrows python-dotenv . Create a .env file and save your API keys there. Why the built-in ScrapeWebsiteTool fails on competitor pages The problem, as established earlier, starts before the analysis. A CrewAI workflow depends primarily on the information collected, because a competitor intelligence agent relie

What are MCP Servers? The Model Context Protocol (MCP) is an open standard that lets AI agents use external tools through a unified interface. Think of it as USB-C for AI — one protocol connects any AI client (Claude Desktop, Cursor, VS Code with Cline) to any tool or data source. I built three production-ready MCP servers and published them to PyPI and GitHub. Here's what they do and how to use them. 1. Web Search MCP Server uvx crewai-web-search-mcp Two tools: web_search(query) — Searches Google/SerpAPI and returns ranked results with snippets extract_content(url) — Fetches and extracts readable content from any web page Use cases: Ask your AI about current events, research competitors, pull documentation, verify facts in real time. { "mcpServers" : { "web-search" : { "command" : "uvx" , "args" : [ "crewai-web-search-mcp" ] } } } 2. Code Review Automation MCP uvx code-review-automation Three tools: review_code(diff) — Analyzes code changes for bugs, security issues, anti-patterns, style violations check_quality(path) — Runs static analysis and returns a quality report analyze_pr(diff) — Produces a structured review: what changed, what's risky, suggestions Use cases: Paste a PR diff and get an instant review. Catch issues before they reach production. 3. Document Intelligence Server uvx document-intelligence-server Three tools: extract_document(path) — OCR and text extraction from PDFs, scanned docs, images classify_document(path) — Identifies document type (invoice, report, contract, article) summarize_document(path) — Generates a structured summary from extracted content Use cases: Process uploaded PDFs, extract data from scanned forms, summarize long reports. Pricing All three servers use a shared credit system: Tier Price Credits Free $0 50 calls/day Starter $20 2,000 calls Pro $100 12,000 calls Buy credits once, use them across any server. Credits never expire. How it works: Install with uvx crewai-web-search-mcp Use 50 free calls per day — no key needed For u

Hermes-Crew Hybrid: A Hybrid Architecture for Secure Multi-Agent AI Workflows I built a hybrid system that combines a central orchestrator (Hermes) with temporary CrewAI micro-crews, protected by 3 layers of security. Here's what it does and why it matters. The Problem Multi-agent AI systems are powerful but dangerous. When you chain multiple agents together, a single compromised agent can poison the entire workflow. Existing solutions are either too heavy (enterprise PKI infrastructure) or too light (basic regex filters). The Solution: 3-Layer Security Layer 1 — Pre-execution (MCP Tool Auditor): Before any agent can register a tool, it's audited for malicious instructions. Layer 2 — Runtime (Agent Fixer Stage): Every output from every agent passes through a 3-stage pipeline (normalization → pattern matching → embeddings) in under 1ms. Layer 3 — Pre-commit (Code Safety Hook): Before any git commit lands, the diff is analyzed by CrewAI + Ollama local. Malicious code gets rejected automatically. Architecture Hermes (Director) │ ├── MCP Tool Auditor → verifies tools before registration │ ├── Execution: venv (fast) / Docker (isolated) / auto (smart) │ ├── Agent 1: Researcher │ ├── Agent 2: Analyst │ └── Agent 3: Writer │ ├── Security Gateway (Agent Fixer Stage) → filters output (<1ms) │ └── Consolidator → parses output + generates Obsidian notes What Makes It Different 1. Portable by design. Zero hardcoded paths. Every user configures their own .env . 2. Multi-model via LiteLLM. Works with Ollama local, OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini, Groq, OpenRouter — any provider. 3. Local-first. Everything runs on the user's machine. No cloud dependencies required. 4. Obsidian integration. Every analysis generates a structured note with YAML frontmatter. Code Safety Hook in Action When you run git commit with malicious code: ❌ [ COMMIT RECHAZADO] Code Safety detected risks: → CrewAI detected vulnerabilities: VERDICT: FAIL → Agent Fixer Stage detected anomalies: High threat score: 1.05 Fo