advanced⏱35 minutesLección 6 de 10
Patrón de Agente Reflexivo
Implementa el patrón de reflexión en LangGraph — bucles de generar, criticar y refinar para agentes que mejoran iterativamente su salida.
Patrón de Agente Reflexivo
The reflection pattern enables agents to self-improve by generating output, critiquing it, and refining it based on the critique. This creates a quality loop that produces better results than single-pass generation.
El Bucle de Reflexión
Generate → Critique → Refine → Critique → Refine → ... → Accept
Each iteration:
- Generate: Produce initial output (or refine from previous)
- Critique: Analyze the output for issues, gaps, or improvements
- Refine: Improve based on critique
- Repeat: Until quality threshold is met or max iterations reached
Grafo de Reflexión Básico
python
from langgraph.graph import StateGraph, START, END
from langchain_openai import ChatOpenAI
from typing_extensions import TypedDict
from typing import Annotated, List
from operator import add
llm = ChatOpenAI(model="gpt-4o")
class ReflectionState(TypedDict):
topic: str
drafts: Annotated[List[str], add] # Accumulate all drafts
critiques: Annotated[List[str], add] # Accumulate all critiques
final: str
iteration: int
max_iterations: int
def generate(state: ReflectionState) -> dict:
context = ""
if state["critiques"]:
# Incorporate last critique
last_critique = state["critiques"][-1]
context = f"\nPrevious critique to address:\n{last_critique}"
prompt = f"Write about: {state['topic']}. Be thorough and clear.{context}"
draft = llm.invoke(prompt).content
return {
"drafts": [draft],
"iteration": state["iteration"] + 1
}
def critique(state: ReflectionState) -> dict:
last_draft = state["drafts"][-1]
prompt = f"""Critique the following text. Identify:
1. Strengths
2. Weaknesses or gaps
3. Specific improvements needed
4. Clarity and structure issues
Text to critique:
{last_draft}
Be constructive and specific."""
critique_text = llm.invoke(prompt).content
return {"critiques": [critique_text]}
def should_continue(state: ReflectionState) -> str:
if state["iteration"] >= state["max_iterations"]:
return "finalize"
return "refine"
def finalize(state: ReflectionState) -> dict:
return {"final": state["drafts"][-1]}
# Build graph
builder = StateGraph(ReflectionState)
builder.add_node("generate", generate)
builder.add_node("critique", critique)
builder.add_node("finalize", finalize)
builder.add_edge(START, "generate")
builder.add_edge("generate", "critique")
builder.add_conditional_edges("critique", should_continue, {
"refine": "generate", # Loop back for another iteration
"finalize": "finalize"
})
builder.add_edge("finalize", END)
app = builder.compile()
# Run
result = app.invoke({
"topic": "Benefits of functional programming",
"drafts": [],
"critiques": [],
"final": "",
"iteration": 0,
"max_iterations": 3
})
print(result["final"])[!NOTA] The critique is fed back into the next generate call as context. The generator addresses the critique points, creating an improving cycle.
Crítica Estructurada con Puntuación
python
from pydantic import BaseModel, Field
class CritiqueScore(BaseModel):
clarity: float = Field(ge=0, le=10)
accuracy: float = Field(ge=0, le=10)
completeness: float = Field(ge=0, le=10)
conciseness: float = Field(ge=0, le=10)
overall: float = Field(ge=0, le=10)
issues: list[str]
suggestions: list[str]
def structured_critique(state: ReflectionState) -> dict:
from langchain_core.output_parsers import PydanticOutputParser
parser = PydanticOutputParser(pydantic_object=CritiqueScore)
prompt = ChatPromptTemplate.from_messages([
("system", "Critique the text and provide structured scores. {format_instructions}"),
("human", "{text}")
])
chain = prompt | llm | parser
score = chain.invoke({
"text": state["drafts"][-1],
"format_instructions": parser.get_format_instructions()
})
return {
"critiques": [f"Score: {score.overall}/10\nIssues: {', '.join(score.issues)}\nSuggestions: {', '.join(score.suggestions)}"]
}[!ÉXITO] Structured critiques with scores let you track improvement over iterations and set quality thresholds for early termination.
Terminación por Umbral de Calidad
python
def quality_router(state: ReflectionState) -> str:
last_critique = state["critiques"][-1] if state["critiques"] else ""
# Check if quality is acceptable (simplified — look for score)
if "Score:" in last_critique:
try:
score_line = [l for l in last_critique.split("\n") if "Score:" in l][0]
score = float(score_line.split("/")[0].split(":")[1].strip())
if score >= 8.0: # Quality threshold met
return "finalize"
except (IndexError, ValueError):
pass
if state["iteration"] >= state["max_iterations"]:
return "finalize"
return "refine"Crítica de Múltiples Perspectivas
Use multiple critique angles for thorough feedback:
python
def critic_expert(state: ReflectionState) -> dict:
"""Critique from an expert perspective."""
prompt = f"As a domain expert, critique this: {state['drafts'][-1]}"
return {"critiques": [f"[Expert] {llm.invoke(prompt).content}"]}
def critic_stylist(state: ReflectionState) -> dict:
"""Critique from a writing style perspective."""
prompt = f"As a writing stylist, critique the clarity and flow: {state['drafts'][-1]}"
return {"critiques": [f"[Style] {llm.invoke(prompt).content}"]}
def critic_fact_checker(state: ReflectionState) -> dict:
"""Critique from a factual accuracy perspective."""
prompt = f"Fact-check this text. Identify any unsupported claims: {state['drafts'][-1]}"
return {"critiques": [f"[Facts] {llm.invoke(prompt).content}"]}[!CONSEJO] Multiple critics provide different perspectives. The generator receives all critiques and must address all of them in the next iteration.
Mejora de Código con Reflexión
The reflection pattern works for code generation too:
python
def generate_code(state: ReflectionState) -> dict:
context = ""
if state["critiques"]:
context = f"\nAddress these issues:\n{state['critiques'][-1]}"
prompt = f"Write Python code for: {state['topic']}. Include tests.{context}"
code = llm.invoke(prompt).content
return {"drafts": [code], "iteration": state["iteration"] + 1}
def critique_code(state: ReflectionState) -> dict:
code = state["drafts"][-1]
prompt = f"""Review this Python code for:
1. Correctness — will it work?
2. Edge cases — what could break it?
3. Performance — can it be optimized?
4. Style — does it follow PEP 8?
5. Security — are there vulnerabilities?
Code:
{code}
Be specific about each issue."""
critique_text = llm.invoke(prompt).content
return {"critiques": [critique_text]}Agente de Reflexión Completo
python
from langgraph.graph import StateGraph, START, END
from typing_extensions import TypedDict, Annotated
from typing import List
from operator import add
class AgentState(TypedDict):
task: str
outputs: Annotated[List[str], add]
feedback: Annotated[List[str], add]
iteration: int
max_iterations: int
def generate(state: AgentState) -> dict:
context = ""
if state["feedback"]:
context = f"\nPrevious feedback: {state['feedback'][-1]}"
prompt = f"Task: {state['task']}. Produce your best work.{context}"
return {"outputs": [llm.invoke(prompt).content], "iteration": state["iteration"] + 1}
def reflect(state: AgentState) -> dict:
prompt = f"Critique this output constructively:\n{state['outputs'][-1]}"
return {"feedback": [llm.invoke(prompt).content]}
def router(state: AgentState) -> str:
return "refine" if state["iteration"] < state["max_iterations"] else "done"
builder = StateGraph(AgentState)
builder.add_node("generate", generate)
builder.add_node("reflect", reflect)
builder.add_edge(START, "generate")
builder.add_edge("generate", "reflect")
builder.add_conditional_edges("reflect", router, {"refine": "generate", "done": END})
app = builder.compile()Preguntas Prácticas
Practice Question
What is the reflection pattern in LangGraph?
Practice Question
How does the generate node use feedback from the critique node?
Practice Question
What determines when the reflection loop stops?
Practice Question
What is the advantage of structured critique with scores?
Practice Question
What is the benefit of multi-perspective critique?
Practice Question
How does the reflection pattern improve code generation?
Practice Question
What risk should you mitigate in the reflection loop?
Practice Question
What happens in the critique node of the basic reflection graph?
Practice Question
What does the 'add' reducer do for the drafts field in reflection state?
Practice Question
Can the reflection pattern be applied to agent decisions, not just text?
[!ÉXITO]
Conclusiones Clave
- Reflection pattern: generate → critique → refine — iteratively improving output
- Critique feedback is passed as context to the next generation prompt
- Structured scoring enables quantitative quality tracking and early termination
- Multi-perspective critiques catch different types of issues
- The pattern works for text, code, and agent decisions
- Balance iteration count against token costs
- The 'add' reducer preserves improvement history
- Quality thresholds prevent unnecessary iterations when output is already good
Progreso60%