Great read! We're running into a similar problem at my company: we've given agents the ability to query our databases but not enough guidance to write correct and efficient queries. I haven't tried solving this problem yet but I'm curious if you explored any code-to-sql approaches, something similar to SQLAlchemy but with your own guardrails and customizations?
That's a pretty interesting idea! I guess 160+ is sort of doing some of that for us - it compiles to SQL WHERE clauses, right - but generally, we found good results giving it a SQL dialect directly.
I think some of the reason is that there's so much coverage of writing SQL in its training set.
Comments
Great read! We're running into a similar problem at my company: we've given agents the ability to query our databases but not enough guidance to write correct and efficient queries. I haven't tried solving this problem yet but I'm curious if you explored any code-to-sql approaches, something similar to SQLAlchemy but with your own guardrails and customizations?
That's a pretty interesting idea! I guess 160+ is sort of doing some of that for us - it compiles to SQL WHERE clauses, right - but generally, we found good results giving it a SQL dialect directly.
I think some of the reason is that there's so much coverage of writing SQL in its training set.
Good point, that makes a lot of sense to use a tool that has plenty of sample usage data available.