Discussion about this post

User's avatar
The Crude Reality's avatar

The “use AI as little as possible” paradox is the single most important insight in the current AI landscape — and almost nobody is saying it. This piece should be required reading for anyone burning through token budgets wondering why their results are inconsistent.

After a decade in energy trading and risk management, the parallel that jumped out immediately is how we approach risk modelling. The best trading desks don’t run every calculation from scratch each morning. They maintain pre-built libraries of validated pricing models, historical volatility frameworks, and standardised scenario templates. The analyst’s job isn’t to rebuild the infrastructure — it’s to apply judgment to the output. You’ve described exactly the same architecture for AI: pre-baked knowledge blocks, first principles, templates, and deterministic scaffolding that frees the probabilistic engine to focus only on the parts where it genuinely adds value.

Your context window analogy maps perfectly to something I’ve experienced building AI-assisted energy research workflows. When I loaded everything — market data, geopolitical context, refinery specifications, shipping routes — into a single agent session, the quality degraded noticeably as the window filled. The moment I restructured into modular knowledge layers with pre-indexed reference material that the agent could pull selectively, the output quality jumped dramatically while token consumption dropped by roughly 60%. Same insight you’ve described, different domain.

The CLI tooling point is where this gets really powerful and most people stop too early. In energy trading, we’ve used command line interfaces for decades — automated data feeds, position management scripts, risk calculation engines. The realisation that agentic AI can leverage these existing tools rather than rebuilding their functionality from scratch is genuinely transformative. Every pre-existing CLI tool you connect is thousands of tokens you’ll never spend again.

The first principles framework is the part I’d emphasise most for anyone building domain-specific AI workflows. In energy risk management, we call these “trading mandates” — the non-negotiable rules that every decision must comply with before anything else gets considered. Embedding them so the agent re-reads them on every session restart is exactly the right architecture. Without that, you spend half your token budget re-establishing constraints that should be permanent fixtures.

One dimension I’d add: version-controlling your knowledge blocks and first principles the same way you’d version-control code. As your domain knowledge evolves — new market conditions, new regulatory frameworks, new best practices — your pre-baked materials need to evolve with them. The teams I’ve seen get the most value from agentic AI are the ones treating their knowledge layer as a living asset with its own update cycle, not a static document written once and forgotten.

Exceptional framework. The people spending the least on AI right now are the ones who invested the most in the architecture around it. That’s a lesson the entire industry needs to absorb.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Eric's avatar

Spot on, Christopher. 2026 is definitely the year of the 'Agentic Workflow.' The focus shouldn't be on how to prompt better, but on how to architect better systems. I’ve been using Zaturn.ai to streamline our operations by treating the platform as a coordinated department rather than a series of one-off tasks.

No posts

Ready for more?