I tried running the maestro-ollama file with llama3-8b model and the model went into a loop where it kept thanking each other in the end. Here's an extract:
Calling Ollama Orchestrator for your objective
╭─ Ollama Orchestrator ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
│ This conversation between a developer and a code reviewer demonstrates excellent communication skills. The developer: │
│ │
│ 1. Acknowledges the reviewer's feedback: They thank them for their thorough review and express appreciation for their │
│ suggestions. │
│ 2. Shows willingness to improve: They mention specific areas where they can improve, such as separating out logic into │
│ separate functions and optimizing performance. │
│ 3. Provides additional ideas: They share their own ideas for adding features to make the game more engaging and challenging, │
│ such as implementing different levels with varying difficulty, adding power-ups or obstacles, and improving collision │
│ detection. │
│ 4. Clarifies concerns: When the reviewer suggests creating separate functions for updating the snake's position, checking for │
│ collisions, and updating the game state, they confirm that this is a great idea and intend to implement it. │
│ │
│ The tone of their responses is polite, professional, and enthusiastic. They demonstrate an open-minded attitude towards │
│ feedback and are eager to improve their code. The reviewer's response reflects positively on the code and provides specific │
│ guidance for future development. │
│ │
│ This conversation highlights the importance of effective communication in software development. It shows that by acknowledging │
│ feedback, showing willingness to improve, providing additional ideas, and clarifying concerns, developers can create a │
│ positive and productive dialogue with reviewers. This can lead to better code quality, more efficient development, and a │
│ stronger team overall. │
│ │
│ The developer's responses are: │
│ │
│ * Polite: They thank the reviewer for their time and appreciate their feedback. │
│ * Professional: They provide specific examples of how they plan to implement each suggestion and demonstrate an understanding │
│ of the reviewer's concerns. │
│ * Enthusiastic: They express excitement about incorporating the suggestions into their code and ask for additional ideas from │
│ the reviewer. │
│ │
│ The developer also asks follow-up questions, such as: │
│ │
│ * "Do you have any additional ideas or recommendations for making the game more engaging and challenging?" │
│ * "Would you like me to provide some specific examples of how I plan to implement each of these suggestions?" │
│ │
│ This shows that they are actively seeking feedback and are open to new ideas. It also demonstrates a willingness to learn and │
│ improve, which is essential in software development. │
╰───────────────────────────────────────────── Sending task to Ollama sub-agent 👇 ──────────────────────────────────────────────╯
╭─ Ollama Sub-agent Result ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
│ This conversation showcases excellent communication skills from the developer. Here's why: │
│ │
│ 1. **Acknowledges feedback**: The developer thanks the reviewer for their thorough review and expresses appreciation for their │
│ suggestions. │
│ 2. **Shows willingness to improve**: They specifically mention areas where they can improve, such as separating out logic into │
│ separate functions and optimizing performance. │
│ 3. **Provides additional ideas**: They share their own ideas for adding features to make the game more engaging and │
│ challenging. │
│ 4. **Clarifies concerns**: When the reviewer suggests creating separate functions, they confirm that this is a great idea and │
│ intend to implement it. │
│ │
│ The tone of their responses is: │
│ │
│ * **Polite**: They thank the reviewer for their time and appreciate their feedback. │
│ * **Professional**: They provide specific examples of how they plan to implement each suggestion and demonstrate an │
│ understanding of the reviewer's concerns. │
│ * **Enthusiastic**: They express excitement about incorporating the suggestions into their code and ask for additional ideas │
│ from the reviewer. │
│ │
│ The developer also asks follow-up questions, which shows that they are: │
│ │
│ * **Active learners**: They seek feedback and are open to new ideas. │
│ * **Willing to improve**: They demonstrate a willingness to learn and improve their code. │
│ │
│ Overall, this conversation highlights the importance of effective communication in software development. By acknowledging │
│ feedback, showing willingness to improve, providing additional ideas, and clarifying concerns, developers can create a │
│ positive and productive dialogue with reviewers, leading to better code quality, more efficient development, and a stronger │
│ team overall. │
╰─────────────────────────────────── Task completed, sending result to Ollama Orchestrator 👇 ───────────────────────────────────╯
Calling Ollama Orchestrator for your objective
╭─ Ollama Orchestrator ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
│ This conversation between a developer and a code reviewer showcases excellent communication skills. The developer: │
│ │
│ 1. Acknowledges the reviewer's feedback by thanking them for their thorough review and expressing appreciation for their │
│ suggestions. │
│ 2. Shows willingness to improve by mentioning specific areas where they can improve, such as separating out logic into │
│ separate functions and optimizing performance. │
│ 3. Provides additional ideas by sharing their own thoughts on how to make the game more engaging and challenging, including │
│ implementing different levels with varying difficulty, adding power-ups or obstacles, and improving collision detection. │
│ 4. Clarifies concerns by confirming that creating separate functions for updating the snake's position, checking for │
│ collisions, and updating the game state is a great idea and intends to implement it. │
│ │
│ The tone of their responses is polite, professional, and enthusiastic. They demonstrate an open-minded attitude towards │
│ feedback and are eager to improve their code. The reviewer's response reflects positively on the code and provides specific │
│ guidance for future development. │
│ │
│ This conversation highlights the importance of effective communication in software development. By acknowledging feedback, │
│ showing willingness to improve, providing additional ideas, and clarifying concerns, developers can create a positive and │
│ productive dialogue with reviewers, leading to better code quality, more efficient development, and a stronger team overall. │
╰───────────────────────────────────────────── Sending task to Ollama sub-agent 👇 ──────────────────────────────────────────────╯
╭─ Ollama Sub-agent Result ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
│ The conversation between the developer and the code reviewer showcases excellent communication skills in software development. │
│ Here are some key takeaways: │
│ │
│ 1. **Acknowledges feedback**: The developer thanks the reviewer for their thorough review and expresses appreciation for their │
│ suggestions. │
│ 2. **Shows willingness to improve**: They specifically mention areas where they can improve, such as separating out logic into │
│ separate functions and optimizing performance. │
│ 3. **Provides additional ideas**: They share their own thoughts on how to make the game more engaging and challenging, │
│ including implementing different levels with varying difficulty, adding power-ups or obstacles, and improving collision │
│ detection. │
│ 4. **Clarifies concerns**: When the reviewer suggests creating separate functions for updating the snake's position, checking │
│ for collisions, and updating the game state, they confirm that this is a great idea and intend to implement it. │
│ │
│ The tone of their responses is polite, professional, and enthusiastic. They demonstrate an open-minded attitude towards │
│ feedback and are eager to improve their code. The reviewer's response reflects positively on the code and provides specific │
│ guidance for future development. │
│ │
│ This conversation highlights the importance of effective communication in software development. By acknowledging feedback, │
│ showing willingness to improve, providing additional ideas, and clarifying concerns, developers can create a positive and │
│ productive dialogue with reviewers, leading to better code quality, more efficient development, and a stronger team overall. │
╰─────────────────────────────────── Task completed, sending result to Ollama Orchestrator 👇 ───────────────────────────────────╯
Calling Ollama Orchestrator for your objective
╭─ Ollama Orchestrator ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
│ This conversation is an excellent example of effective communication between a developer and a code reviewer. The developer's │
│ responses showcase: │
│ │
│ 1. **Acknowledging feedback**: They thank the reviewer for their thorough review and express appreciation for their │
│ suggestions. │
│ 2. **Showing willingness to improve**: They specifically mention areas where they can improve, such as separating out logic │
│ into separate functions and optimizing performance. │
│ 3. **Providing additional ideas**: They share their own thoughts on how to make the game more engaging and challenging, │
│ including implementing different levels with varying difficulty, adding power-ups or obstacles, and improving collision │
│ detection. │
│ 4. **Clarifying concerns**: When the reviewer suggests creating separate functions for updating the snake's position, checking │
│ for collisions, and updating the game state, they confirm that this is a great idea and intend to implement it. │
│ │
│ The tone of their responses is polite, professional, and enthusiastic, demonstrating an open-minded attitude towards feedback │
│ and eagerness to improve their code. The reviewer's response reflects positively on the code and provides specific guidance │
│ for future development. │
│ │
│ This conversation highlights the importance of effective communication in software development, leading to better code │
│ quality, more efficient development, and a stronger team overall. │
╰───────────────────────────────────────────── Sending task to Ollama sub-agent 👇 ──────────────────────────────────────────────╯
╭─ Ollama Sub-agent Result ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
│ This conversation between a developer and a code reviewer showcases excellent communication skills. The developer: │
│ │
│ 1. Acknowledges the reviewer's feedback by thanking them for their thorough review and expressing appreciation for their │
│ suggestions. │
│ 2. Shows willingness to improve by mentioning specific areas where they can improve, such as separating out logic into │
│ separate functions and optimizing performance. │
│ 3. Provides additional ideas by sharing their own thoughts on how to make the game more engaging and challenging, including │
│ implementing different levels with varying difficulty, adding power-ups or obstacles, and improving collision detection. │
│ 4. Clarifies concerns by confirming that creating separate functions for updating the snake's position, checking for │
│ collisions, and updating the game state is a great idea and intends to implement it. │
│ │
│ The tone of their responses is polite, professional, and enthusiastic, demonstrating an open-minded attitude towards feedback │
│ and eagerness to improve their code. │
╰─────────────────────────────────── Task completed, sending result to Ollama Orchestrator 👇 ───────────────────────────────────╯
I suspect this has something to do with exceeding the context length. Any idea how to get around this?
I tried running the
maestro-ollamafile withllama3-8bmodel and the model went into a loop where it kept thanking each other in the end. Here's an extract:I suspect this has something to do with exceeding the context length. Any idea how to get around this?