LogotypeSlidebook
Alex Delaney

Alex Delaney

Generating with AI

A slide titled 'Retrieval, Tools, and Agents' comparing three AI system patterns: RAG (blue), Function Calling (green), and Agentic Loop (amber), each presented in a separate column with a diagram and practical tips.
A slide titled 'Retrieval, Tools, and Agents' comparing three AI system patterns: RAG (blue), Function Calling (green), and Agentic Loop (amber), each presented in a separate column with a diagram and practical tips. Fragment #1A slide titled 'Retrieval, Tools, and Agents' comparing three AI system patterns: RAG (blue), Function Calling (green), and Agentic Loop (amber), each presented in a separate column with a diagram and practical tips. Fragment #2A slide titled 'Retrieval, Tools, and Agents' comparing three AI system patterns: RAG (blue), Function Calling (green), and Agentic Loop (amber), each presented in a separate column with a diagram and practical tips. Fragment #3A slide titled 'Retrieval, Tools, and Agents' comparing three AI system patterns: RAG (blue), Function Calling (green), and Agentic Loop (amber), each presented in a separate column with a diagram and practical tips. Fragment #4
This slide was generated for the topic:

Building Grounded and Capable AI Systems with RAG, Function Calling, and Agentic Loops

Description provided by the user:

A user requested a presentation slide that visually compares three fundamental patterns for building advanced Large Language Model (LLM) applications: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), Function Calling, and Agentic Loops. The goal is to explain how these techniques contribute to creating AI systems that are both 'grounded' in facts and 'capable' of performing actions. The user asked for a clean, three-column layout, with each pattern having its own distinct color scheme, a simple diagram, and a list of practical development tips for implementation.

Categories

Technology & SoftwareCoding & ProgrammingFuturism & Innovation

Generated Notes

First, set the frame: we want models that are both grounded and capable. We will walk through three patterns that layer up to that goal. Start with RAG. Explain the simple flow: embed content, store in a vector database, retrieve relevant chunks, and fuse them into the prompt. Emphasize three practical tips: chunk by structure and semantics with minimal overlap, re-rank retrieved passages before fusion, and always attach citations so outputs are traceable. Move to function calling. Show how we constrain the model with a JSON Schema. The model fills arguments via a tool call, and constrained decoding keeps outputs well-formed. Encourage versioning and logging of schemas for reliability and observability. Finish with the agentic loop. Describe the cycle: plan, act via tools or APIs, observe results, and reflect into memory. Keep the loop lightweight: bounded depth, retries and guards on tools, and persistent summaries to improve over time without drifting. Close by connecting the three: RAG grounds answers, function calling lets the model take precise actions, and the agentic loop stitches those actions into iterative capability.

Behind the Scenes

How AI generated this slide

  1. The AI first deconstructed the request into three core concepts: RAG, Function Calling, and Agentic Loops, under the unifying theme of 'Grounded and capable systems'.
  2. A three-column layout was chosen for direct comparison, with a distinct color variant (sky, emerald, amber) assigned to each concept for clear visual distinction and thematic consistency.
  3. The slide was built using a modular, component-based architecture in React, creating reusable elements like 'ColumnCard', 'NodePill', and 'Arrow' for clean and maintainable code.
  4. For each column, the AI designed a custom diagram component to visually represent the core process: a linear flow for RAG, a JSON schema for Function Calling, and a cyclical loop for the Agent.
  5. Finally, the components were assembled into the main slide structure, and comprehensive speaker notes were generated to guide the presenter through explaining each concept and its practical implications.

Why this slide works

This slide excels at making complex AI engineering concepts accessible through a clear and structured visual design. The three-column layout allows for easy side-by-side comparison of RAG, Function Calling, and Agents. The distinct color-coding for each pattern creates strong visual recall and helps differentiate the concepts. Each column combines a title, a conceptual badge (Grounding, Control, Autonomy), a simplified diagram, and actionable bullet points, providing a multi-layered explanation that caters to both quick glances and deeper dives. The use of Framer Motion for subtle animations adds a professional polish, making the content more engaging. The code itself is clean and follows modern front-end development practices, making it a great example of high-quality web component design.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main difference between RAG, Function Calling, and Agents?

RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) is for 'grounding'; it connects the AI model to external knowledge to provide factual, verifiable answers with citations. Function Calling provides 'control'; it allows the model to interact with external APIs by generating structured data, like JSON, to call specific functions. Agents represent 'autonomy'; they create an iterative loop (Plan → Act → Observe → Reflect) where the model can use tools (via function calling) and knowledge (via RAG) to complete complex, multi-step tasks. They build on each other: RAG grounds the model, functions give it tools, and agents orchestrate those tools over time.

Why is 'constrained decoding' important for Function Calling?

Constrained decoding is crucial for reliability in Function Calling. When an AI model needs to call a function, it must generate arguments that match a predefined structure, typically a JSON Schema. Without constraints, the model might generate invalid JSON or arguments with incorrect data types, causing the API call to fail. Constrained decoding forces the model's output to conform to the schema during generation, guaranteeing that the output is always valid. This eliminates brittle parsing and error-handling logic, making the entire system more robust and predictable.

What are the risks of using an Agentic Loop and how can they be mitigated?

Agentic loops, while powerful, risk getting stuck in infinite cycles, taking unintended actions, and incurring high costs from repeated model/tool calls. The slide suggests mitigations for these issues. To prevent infinite loops, you should 'cap depth' to limit the number of cycles. To ensure reliability, use 'small, reliable tools' and implement 'retry with guards' logic for tool call failures. To manage state and avoid drift, it's vital to 'persist summaries' of actions and observations in a short-term memory, as highlighted in the 'Reflect' step of the loop.

Related Slides

A slide divided into two main panels. The left panel, themed in blue, is titled 'Evaluation' and lists benchmarks and tests. The right panel, themed in rose, is titled 'Red Teaming & Safety' and lists adversarial testing methods. A small overlay at the bottom details 'Run hygiene' with a checklist.

A Dual-Pronged Framework for Comprehensive AI Model Evaluation and Safety Assurance

A slide titled 'Efficiency, Cost, and Footprint' detailing AI model optimization. The left side lists techniques like Chinchilla scaling and LoRA. The right side features two charts: a line graph showing decreasing training loss with more tokens, and a bar chart quantifying cost savings from quantization and batching.

Strategies for Enhancing AI Model Efficiency and Reducing Operational Costs

A slide titled 'Inference & Serving at Scale' detailing LLM optimization techniques. The left side lists methods like decoding strategies and quantization. The right side features a table comparing these methods' impact on latency vs. quality with colored up/down arrows.

Strategies for Scaling Large Language Model Inference: Balancing Latency, Throughput, and Quality

A slide comparing AI alignment methods SFT, RLHF, and DPO. Three color-coded panels detail each method, a table compares them on metrics like stability and compute, and a banner at the bottom highlights safety layers.

A Comparative Analysis of AI Alignment Techniques: SFT, RLHF, and DPO for Preference Learning

A slide titled 'Training Pipeline & Optimization' showing a flowchart of a machine learning training process. The flow includes stages like Sharded Dataset, Data Loader, Mixed Precision BF16, and Distributed Training. A sidebar on the right details stability tips and throughput metrics with bar charts.

Visualizing a Modern Deep Learning Training Pipeline and Key Optimization Strategies for Stability and Throughput.

A slide titled 'Data & Tokenization' detailing the AI training pipeline. It features a two-column layout showing data considerations, an animated BPE tokenization example, a sequence length histogram, and a quality checklist.

An overview of the data and tokenization pipeline for training large language models, covering quality and splits.

Want to generate your own slides with AI?

Start creating high-tech, AI-powered presentations with Slidebook.

Try Slidebook for FreeEnter the beta