Wild it’s taken people this long to realize this. Also lean tickets / tasks with all needed context to complete the task, including needed references / docs, places to look in source, acceptance criteria, other stuff.
Conductor is a LLM agnostic framework for building sophisticated AI applications using a subagent architecture. It provides a robust platform for orchestrating multiple specialized AI agents to accomplish complex tasks, with features like LLM-based planning, memory persistence, and dynamic tool use.
It provides a robust and flexible platform for orchestrating multiple specialized AI agents to accomplish complex tasks. This project is inspired by the concepts outlined in "The Rise of Subagents" by Phil Schmid at https://www.philschmid.de/the-rise-of-subagents and it aims to provide a practical implementation of this powerful architectural pattern.
I read a paper called "The Rise of Subagents" by Phil Schmid at https://www.philschmid.de/the-rise-of-subagents and thought it was an incredibly powerful architectural pattern for running AI agents with complex tasks.
So, I decided to build a practical implementation of this system with a central Orchestrator that manages a fleet of implicit or explicit Subagents. Each subagent is a specialized, isolated AI agent designed to perform a specific subtask. More details in the repo README at https://github.com/skanga/conductor
It's hard to evaluate such a tool. I scanned my OSS MCP server for databases at https://github.com/skanga/dbchat and it found 0 vulnerabilities. Now I'm wondering if my code is perfect :-) or the tool has issues!
DBChat is a powerful MCP server that lets you have natural language conversations with your database from clients like Claude Desktop. Ask it to do complex analysis, generate beautiful visualizations, or build custom interactive dashboards based your data. Works with any JDBC-compatible database with support for most SQL DBs like PostgreSQL, MySQL, Oracle, SQL Server, SQLite, MongoDB, etc.
Good question. I’ll publish benchmarks soon, but the core difference is that Fahmatrix is fully Java, no JNI, and minimalistic — ideal for small projects or environments like Android. Tablesaw and Arrow are more powerful, but heavier. Fahmatrix aims to be the “just enough” middle ground.