from my experience its about the speed of a very competant human - one of my favorite custom tools ive written is just access to a series of bash commands - havent tested with others but claude very quickly browses through files, reads them, and so on to do whatever it was you prompted. But even then it is all contextual - for example, I had to remove 'find' because as one would expect, running 'find' against a huge directory set is very slow!
Well, the bottleneck there would usually be the LLM, because, e.g., a tool to inspect a filesystem directory would be very fast, and it wouldn't necessarily return a lot of data, so I am confused what this article is really trying to say.
Comments
Is this true for all tool calls? Even if the tool returns little data?
from my experience its about the speed of a very competant human - one of my favorite custom tools ive written is just access to a series of bash commands - havent tested with others but claude very quickly browses through files, reads them, and so on to do whatever it was you prompted. But even then it is all contextual - for example, I had to remove 'find' because as one would expect, running 'find' against a huge directory set is very slow!
Well, the bottleneck there would usually be the LLM, because, e.g., a tool to inspect a filesystem directory would be very fast, and it wouldn't necessarily return a lot of data, so I am confused what this article is really trying to say.