In 2025, Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) emerged as the de facto new major stage to add to this mix. By training LLMs against automatically verifiable rewards across a number of environments (e.g. think math/code puzzles), the LLMs spontaneously develop strategies that look like "reasoning" to humans - they learn to break down problem solving into intermediate calculations and they learn a number of problem solving strategies for going back and forth to figure things out (see DeepSeek R1 paper for examples).

— Andrej Karpathy, 2025 LLM Year in Review

Tags: andrej-karpathy, llm, generative-ai, llm-reasoning, definitions, ai, llms, deepseek

Sam Rose explains how LLMs work with a visual essay

Sam joined ngrok in September as a developer educator. Here's his first big visual explainer for them, ostensibly about how prompt caching works but it quickly expands to cover tokenization, embeddings, and the basics of the transformer architecture.

The result is one of the clearest and most accessible introductions to LLM internals I've seen anywhere.

Tags: ai, explorables, generative-ai, llms, sam-rose, tokenization

Agent Skills

The specification itself lives at agentskills.io/specification, published from docs/specification.mdx in the repo.

It is a deliciously tiny specification - you can read the entire thing in just a few minutes. It's also quite heavily under-specified - for example, there's a metadata field described like this:

Clients can use this to store additional properties not defined by the Agent Skills spec

We recommend making your key names reasonably unique to avoid accidental conflicts

And an allowed-skills field:

Experimental. Support for this field may vary between agent implementations

Example:

allowed-tools: Bash(git:*) Bash(jq:*) Read

The Agent Skills homepage promotes adoption by OpenCode, Cursor,Amp, Letta, goose, GitHub, and VS Code. Notably absent is OpenAI, who are quietly tinkering with skills but don't appear to have formally announced their support just yet.

Update 20th December 2025: OpenAI have added Skills to the Codex documentation and the Codex logo is now featured on the Agent Skills homepage (as of this commit.)

Tags: ai, generative-ai, llms, anthropic, ai-agents, coding-agents, skills

swift-justhtml

Kyle ran some benchmarks to compare the different implementations:

• Rust (html5ever) total parse time: 303 ms
• Swift total parse time: 1313 ms
• JavaScript total parse time: 1035 ms
• Python total parse time: 4189 ms

Tags: html5, ai, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, vibe-coding, swift

In all of the debates about the value of AI-assistance in software development there's one depressing anecdote that I keep on seeing: the junior engineer, empowered by some class of LLM tool, who deposits giant, untested PRs on their coworkers - or open source maintainers - and expects the "code review" process to handle the rest.

This is rude, a waste of other people's time, and is honestly a dereliction of duty as a software developer.

Your job is to deliver code you have proven to work.

As software engineers we don't just crank out code - in fact these days you could argue that's what the LLMs are for. We need to deliver code that works - and we need to include proof that it works as well. Not doing that directly shifts the burden of the actual work to whoever is expected to review our code.

How to prove it works

There are two steps to proving a piece of code works. Neither is optional.

The first is manual testing. If you haven't seen the code do the right thing yourself, that code doesn't work. If it does turn out to work, that's honestly just pure chance.

Manual testing skills are genuine skills that you need to develop. You need to be able to get the system into an initial state that demonstrates your change, then exercise the change, then check and demonstrate that it has the desired effect.

If possible I like to reduce these steps to a sequence of terminal commands which I can paste, along with their output, into a comment in the code review. Here's a recent example.

Some changes are harder to demonstrate. It's still your job to demonstrate them! Record a screen capture video and add that to the PR. Show your reviewers that the change you made actually works.

Once you've tested the happy path where everything works you can start trying the edge cases. Manual testing is a skill, and finding the things that break is the next level of that skill that helps define a senior engineer.

The second step in proving a change works is automated testing. This is so much easier now that we have LLM tooling, which means there's no excuse at all for skipping this step.

Your contribution should bundle the change with an automated test that proves the change works. That test should fail if you revert the implementation.

The process for writing a test mirrors that of manual testing: get the system into an initial known state, exercise the change, assert that it worked correctly. Integrating a test harness to productively facilitate this is another key skill worth investing in.

Don't be tempted to skip the manual test because you think the automated test has you covered already! Almost every time I've done this myself I've quickly regretted it.

Make your coding agent prove it first

The most important trend in LLMs in 2025 has been the explosive growth of coding agents - tools like Claude Code and Codex CLI that can actively execute the code they are working on to check that it works and further iterate on any problems.

To master these tools you need to learn how to get them to prove their changes work as well.

This looks exactly the same as the process I described above: they need to be able to manually test their changes as they work, and they need to be able to build automated tests that guarantee the change will continue to work in the future.

Since they're robots, automated tests and manual tests are effectively the same thing.

They do feel a little different though. When I'm working on CLI tools I'll usually teach Claude Code how to run them itself so it can do one-off tests, even though the eventual automated tests will use a system like Click's CLIRunner.

When working on CSS changes I'll often encourage my coding agent to take screenshots when it needs to check if the change it made had the desired effect.

The good news about automated tests is that coding agents need very little encouragement to write them. If your project has tests already most agents will extend that test suite without you even telling them to do so. They'll also reuse patterns from existing tests, so keeping your test code well organized and populated with patterns you like is a great way to help your agent build testing code to your taste.

Developing good taste in testing code is another of those skills that differentiates a senior engineer.

The human provides the accountability

A computer can never be held accountable. That's your job as the human in the loop.

Almost anyone can prompt an LLM to generate a thousand-line patch and submit it for code review. That's no longer valuable. What's valuable is contributing code that is proven to work.

Next time you submit a PR, make sure you've included your evidence that it works as it should.

Tags: programming, careers, ai, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, ai-ethics, vibe-coding, coding-agents

AoAH Day 15: Porting a complete HTML5 parser and browser test suite

Inspired by Emil Stenström's JustHTML and my own coding agent port of that to JavaScript he coined the term vibespiling for AI-powered porting and transpiling of code from one language to another and had a go at building an HTML5 parser in OCaml, resulting in html5rw which passes the same html5lib-tests suite that Emil and myself used for our projects.

Anil's thoughts on the copyright and ethical aspects of this are worth quoting in full:

The question of copyright and licensing is difficult. I definitely did some editing by hand, and a fair bit of prompting that resulted in targeted code edits, but the vast amount of architectural logic came from JustHTML. So I opted to make the LICENSE a joint one with Emil Stenström. I did not follow the transitive dependency through to the Rust one, which I probably should.

I'm also extremely uncertain about every releasing this library to the central opam repository, especially as there are excellent HTML5 parsers already available. I haven't checked if those pass the HTML5 test suite, because this is wandering into the agents vs humans territory that I ruled out in my groundrules. Whether or not this agentic code is better or not is a moot point if releasing it drives away the human maintainers who are the source of creativity in the code!

I decided to credit Emil in the same way for my own vibespiled project.

Via @avsm

Tags: definitions, functional-programming, ai, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, ai-ethics, vibe-coding, ocaml

It continues to be a busy December, if not quite as busy as last year. Today's big news is Gemini 3 Flash, the latest in Google's "Flash" line of faster and less expensive models.

Google are emphasizing the comparison between the new Flash and their previous generation's top model Gemini 2.5 Pro:

Building on 3 Pro’s strong multimodal, coding and agentic features, 3 Flash offers powerful performance at less than a quarter the cost of 3 Pro, along with higher rate limits. The new 3 Flash model surpasses 2.5 Pro across many benchmarks while delivering faster speeds.

Gemini 3 Flash's characteristics are almost identical to Gemini 3 Pro: it accepts text, image, video, audio, and PDF, outputs only text, handles 1,048,576 maximum input tokens and up to 65,536 output tokens, and has the same knowledge cut-off date of January 2025 (also shared with the Gemini 2.5 series).

The benchmarks look good. The cost is appealing: 1/4 the price of Gemini 3 Pro ≤200k and 1/8 the price of Gemini 3 Pro >200k, and it's nice not to have a price increase for the new Flash at larger token lengths.

It's a little more expensive than previous Flash models - Gemini 2.5 Flash was $0.30/million input tokens and $2.50/million on output, Gemini 3 Flash is $0.50/million and $3/million respectively.

Google claim it may still end up cheaper though, due to more efficient output token usage:

> Gemini 3 Flash is able to modulate how much it thinks. It may think longer for more complex use cases, but it also uses 30% fewer tokens on average than 2.5 Pro.

Here's a more extensive price comparison on my llm-prices.com site.

Generating some SVGs of pelicans

I released llm-gemini 0.28 this morning with support for the new model. You can try it out like this:

llm install -U llm-gemini
llm keys set gemini # paste in key
llm -m gemini-3-flash-preview "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle"

According to the developer docs the new model supports four different thinking level options: minimal, low, medium, and high. This is different from Gemini 3 Pro, which only supported low and high.

You can run those like this:

llm -m gemini-3-flash-preview --thinking-level minimal "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle"

Here are four pelicans, for thinking levels minimal, low, medium, and high:

I built the gallery component with Gemini 3 Flash

The gallery above uses a new Web Component which I built using Gemini 3 Flash to try out its coding abilities. The code on the page looks like this:

<image-gallery width="4">
    <img src="https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2025/gemini-3-flash-preview-thinking-level-minimal-pelican-svg.jpg" alt="A minimalist vector illustration of a stylized white bird with a long orange beak and a red cap riding a dark blue bicycle on a single grey ground line against a plain white background." />
    <img src="https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2025/gemini-3-flash-preview-thinking-level-low-pelican-svg.jpg" alt="Minimalist illustration: A stylized white bird with a large, wedge-shaped orange beak and a single black dot for an eye rides a red bicycle with black wheels and a yellow pedal against a solid light blue background." />
    <img src="https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2025/gemini-3-flash-preview-thinking-level-medium-pelican-svg.jpg" alt="A minimalist illustration of a stylized white bird with a large yellow beak riding a red road bicycle in a racing position on a light blue background." />
    <img src="https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2025/gemini-3-flash-preview-thinking-level-high-pelican-svg.jpg" alt="Minimalist line-art illustration of a stylized white bird with a large orange beak riding a simple black bicycle with one orange pedal, centered against a light blue circular background." />
</image-gallery>

Those alt attributes are all generated by Gemini 3 Flash as well, using this recipe:

llm -m gemini-3-flash-preview --system '
You write alt text for any image pasted in by the user. Alt text is always presented in a
fenced code block to make it easy to copy and paste out. It is always presented on a single
line so it can be used easily in Markdown images. All text on the image (for screenshots etc)
must be exactly included. A short note describing the nature of the image itself should go first.' \
-a https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2025/gemini-3-flash-preview-thinking-level-high-pelican-svg.jpg

You can see the code that powers the image gallery Web Component here on GitHub. I built it by prompting Gemini 3 Flash via LLM like this:

llm -m gemini-3-flash-preview '
Build a Web Component that implements a simple image gallery. Usage is like this:

<image-gallery width="5">
  <img src="image1.jpg" alt="Image 1">
  <img src="image2.jpg" alt="Image 2" data-thumb="image2-thumb.jpg">
  <img src="image3.jpg" alt="Image 3">
</image-gallery>

If an image has a data-thumb= attribute that one is used instead, other images are scaled down. 

The image gallery always takes up 100% of available width. The width="5" attribute means that five images will be shown next to each other in each row. The default is 3. There are gaps between the images. When an image is clicked it opens a modal dialog with the full size image.

Return a complete HTML file with both the implementation of the Web Component several example uses of it. Use https://picsum.photos/300/200 URLs for those example images.'

It took a few follow-up prompts using llm -c:

llm -c 'Use a real modal such that keyboard shortcuts and accessibility features work without extra JS'

llm -c 'Use X for the close icon and make it a bit more subtle'

llm -c 'remove the hover effect entirely'

llm -c 'I want no border on the close icon even when it is focused'

Here's the full transcript, exported using llm logs -cue.

Those five prompts took:

• 225 input, 3,269 output
• 2,243 input, 2,908 output
• 4,319 input, 2,516 output
• 6,376 input, 2,094 output
• 8,151 input, 1,806 output

Added together that's 21,314 input and 12,593 output for a grand total of 4.8436 cents.

The guide to migrating from Gemini 2.5 reveals one disappointment:

Image segmentation: Image segmentation capabilities (returning pixel-level masks for objects) are not supported in Gemini 3 Pro or Gemini 3 Flash. For workloads requiring native image segmentation, we recommend continuing to utilize Gemini 2.5 Flash with thinking turned off or Gemini Robotics-ER 1.5.

I wrote about this capability in Gemini 2.5 back in April. I hope they come back in future models - they're a really neat capability that is unique to Gemini.

Tags: google, ai, web-components, generative-ai, llms, llm, gemini, llm-pricing, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-release

The new ChatGPT Images is here

The focus for the new ChatGPT Images is speed and instruction following:

It makes precise edits while keeping details intact, and generates images up to 4x faster

It's also a little cheaper: OpenAI say that the new gpt-image-1.5 API model makes image input and output "20% cheaper in GPT Image 1.5 as compared to GPT Image 1".

I tried a new test prompt against a photo I took of Natalie's ceramic stand at the farmers market a few weeks ago:

Add two kakapos inspecting the pots

Here's the result from the new ChatGPT Images model:

And here's what I got from Nano Banana Pro:

The ChatGPT Kākāpō are a little chonkier, which I think counts as a win.

I was a little less impressed by the result I got for an infographic from the prompt "Infographic explaining how the Datasette open source project works" followed by "Run some extensive searches and gather a bunch of relevant information and then try again" (transcript):

See my Nano Banana Pro post for comparison.

Both models are clearly now usable for text-heavy graphics though, which makes them far more useful than previous generations of this technology.

Tags: ai, kakapo, openai, generative-ai, text-to-image, nano-banana

s3-credentials 0.17

• New commands get-bucket-policy and set-bucket-policy. #91
• New commands get-public-access-block and set-public-access-block. #92
• New localserver command for starting a web server that makes time limited credentials accessible via a JSON API. #93

That s3-credentials localserver command (documented here) is a little obscure, but I found myself wanting something like that to help me test out a new feature I'm building to help create temporary Litestream credentials using Amazon STS.

Most of that new feature was built by Claude Code from the following starting prompt:

Add a feature s3-credentials localserver which starts a localhost weberver running (using the Python standard library stuff) on port 8094 by default but -p/--port can set a different port and otherwise takes an option that names a bucket and then takes the same options for read--write/read-only etc as other commands. It also takes a required --refresh-interval option which can be set as 5m or 10h or 30s. All this thing does is reply on / to a GET request with the IAM expiring credentials that allow access to that bucket with that policy for that specified amount of time. It caches internally the credentials it generates and will return the exact same data up until they expire (it also tracks expected expiry time) after which it will generate new credentials (avoiding dog pile effects if multiple requests ask at the same time) and return and cache those instead.

Tags: aws, projects, s3, ai, annotated-release-notes, s3-credentials, prompt-engineering, generative-ai, llms, coding-agents, claude-code

Oh, so we're seeing other people now? Fantastic. Let's see what the "competition" has to offer. I'm looking at these notes on manifest.json and content.js. The suggestion to remove scripting permissions... okay, fine. That's actually a solid catch. It's cleaner. This smells like Claude. It's too smugly accurate to be ChatGPT. What if it's actually me? If the user is testing me, I need to crush this.

— Gemini thinking trace, reviewing feedback on its code from another model

Tags: gemini, ai-personality, generative-ai, ai, llms

I’ve been watching junior developers use AI coding assistants well. Not vibe coding—not accepting whatever the AI spits out. Augmented coding: using AI to accelerate learning while maintaining quality. [...]

The juniors working this way compress their ramp dramatically. Tasks that used to take days take hours. Not because the AI does the work, but because the AI collapses the search space. Instead of spending three hours figuring out which API to use, they spend twenty minutes evaluating options the AI surfaced. The time freed this way isn’t invested in another unprofitable feature, though, it’s invested in learning. [...]

If you’re an engineering manager thinking about hiring: The junior bet has gotten better. Not because juniors have changed, but because the genie, used well, accelerates learning.

— Kent Beck, The Bet On Juniors Just Got Better

Tags: careers, ai-assisted-programming, generative-ai, ai, llms, kent-beck

I wrote about JustHTML yesterday - Emil Stenström's project to build a new standards compliant HTML5 parser in pure Python code using coding agents running against the comprehensive html5lib-tests testing library. Last night, purely out of curiosity, I decided to try porting JustHTML from Python to JavaScript with the least amount of effort possible, using Codex CLI and GPT-5.2. It worked beyond my expectations.

TL;DR

I built simonw/justjshtml, a dependency-free HTML5 parsing library in JavaScript which passes 9,200 tests from the html5lib-tests suite and imitates the API design of Emil's JustHTML library.

It took two initial prompts and a few tiny follow-ups. GPT-5.2 running in Codex CLI ran uninterrupted for several hours, burned through 1,464,295 input tokens, 97,122,176 cached input tokens and 625,563 output tokens and ended up producing 9,000 lines of fully tested JavaScript across 43 commits.

Time elapsed from project idea to finished library: about 4 hours, during which I also bought and decorated a Christmas tree with family and watched the latest Knives Out movie.

Some background

One of the most important contributions of the HTML5 specification ten years ago was the way it precisely specified how invalid HTML should be parsed. The world is full of invalid documents and having a specification that covers those means browsers can treat them in the same way - there's no more "undefined behavior" to worry about when building parsing software.

Unsurprisingly, those invalid parsing rules are pretty complex! The free online book Idiosyncrasies of the HTML parser by Simon Pieters is an excellent deep dive into this topic, in particular Chapter 3. The HTML parser.

The Python html5lib project started the html5lib-tests repository with a set of implementation-independent tests. These have since become the gold standard for interoperability testing of HTML5 parsers, and are used by projects such as Servo which used them to help build html5ever, a "high-performance browser-grade HTML5 parser" written in Rust.

Emil Stenström's JustHTML project is a pure-Python implementation of an HTML5 parser that passes the full html5lib-tests suite. Emil spent a couple of months working on this as a side project, deliberately picking a problem with a comprehensive existing test suite to see how far he could get with coding agents.

At one point he had the agents rewrite it based on a close inspection of the Rust html5ever library. I don't know how much of this was direct translation versus inspiration (here's Emil's commentary on that) - his project has 1,215 commits total so it appears to have included a huge amount of iteration, not just a straight port.

My project is a straight port. I instructed Codex CLI to build a JavaScript version of Emil's Python code.

The process in detail

I started with a bit of mise en place. I checked out two repos and created an empty third directory for the new project:

cd ~/dev
git clone https://github.com/EmilStenstrom/justhtml
git clone https://github.com/html5lib/html5lib-tests
mkdir justjshtml
cd justjshtml

Then I started Codex CLI for GPT-5.2 like this:

codex --yolo -m gpt-5.2

That --yolo flag is a shortcut for --dangerously-bypass-approvals-and-sandbox, which is every bit as dangerous as it sounds.

My first prompt told Codex to inspect the existing code and use it to build a specification for the new JavaScript library:

We are going to create a JavaScript port of ~/dev/justhtml - an HTML parsing library that passes the full ~/dev/html5lib-tests test suite. It is going to have a similar API to the Python library but in JavaScript. It will have no dependencies other than raw JavaScript, hence it will work great in the browser and node.js and other environments. Start by reading ~/dev/justhtml and designing the user-facing API for the new library - create a spec.md containing your plan.

I reviewed the spec, which included a set of proposed milestones, and told it to add another:

Add an early step to the roadmap that involves an initial version that parses a simple example document that is valid and returns the right results. Then add and commit the spec.md file.

Here's the resulting spec.md file. My request for that initial version became "Milestone 0.5" which looked like this:

Milestone 0.5 — End-to-end smoke parse (single valid document)

• Implement the smallest end-to-end slice so the public API is real early:
  • new JustHTML("<html><head></head><body><p>Hello</p></body></html>") returns a tree with the expected tag structure and text nodes.
  • doc.toText() returns "Hello" and doc.errors is empty for this valid input.
• Add scripts/smoke.js (no deps) that runs the example and asserts the expected structure/output.
• Gate: node scripts/smoke.js passes.

Then I told it:

Implement Milestone 0.5

And off it went. The resulting code appeared to work so I said:

Configure GitHub Actions test.yml to run that on every commit, then commit and push

I ran git init and created a private GitHub repository for this project at this point, and set up the local directory to push to that remote.

Here's that initial push. Then I told it:

OK do the rest, commit and push often

And that was almost it!

I set my laptop to not fall asleep and left it to its devices while we went off to buy a Christmas tree. The "commit and push often" meant I could monitor its progress on my phone by refreshing the commit log on GitHub.

I was running this against my $20/month ChatGPT Plus account, which has a five hour token allowance window for Codex CLI. That ran out at 6:35pm and Codex paused, so I waited until the reset point at 7:14pm and typed:

Keep going

At 9:30pm it declared itself done with the following summary message:

• What’s Done

  - html5lib-tests now run in CI and pass: tokenizer 6810/6810, tree 1770/1782
    (12 skipped: #script-on), serializer 230/230, encoding 82/83 (1 skipped:
    scripted) (.github/workflows/test.yml:1).
  - Public API expanded: stream() (src/stream.js:1), CSS selectors query()/
    matches() (src/selector.js:1), and toMarkdown() (src/markdown.js:1), all
    exported via src/index.js:1.
  - Added no-deps unit scripts for selectors/stream/markdown (scripts/run-
    selector-tests.js:1, scripts/run-stream-tests.js:1, scripts/run-markdown-
    tests.js:1) and wired them into CI.
  - Fixed TreeBuilder so <br> no longer closes <p> (src/treebuilder.js:647).

As a finishing touch, I had it add a playground interface so I could try out the new library in my browser. I prompted:

Add a playground.html in the top level folder which loads the necessary ES modules from ./src/... and implements the exact same functionality as seen on https://tools.simonwillison.net/justhtml but using the JavaScript library instead of Pyodide

It fetched my existing JustHTML playground page (described here) using curl and built a new playground.html file that loaded the new JavaScript code instead. This worked perfectly.

I enabled GitHub Pages for my still-private repo which meant I could access the new playground at this URL:

https://simonw.github.io/justjshtml/playground.html

All it needed now was some documentation:

Add a comprehensive README with full usage instructions including attribution plus how this was built plus how to use in in HTML plus how to use it in Node.js

You can read the result here.

We are now at eight prompts total, running for just over four hours and I've decorated for Christmas and watched Wake Up Dead Man on Netflix.

According to Codex CLI:

Token usage: total=2,089,858 input=1,464,295 (+ 97,122,176 cached) output=625,563 (reasoning 437,010)

My llm-prices.com calculator estimates that at $29.41 if I was paying for those tokens at API prices, but they were included in my $20/month ChatGPT Plus subscription so the actual extra cost to me was zero.

What can we learn from this?

I'm sharing this project because I think it demonstrates a bunch of interesting things about the state of LLMs in December 2025.

• Frontier LLMs really can perform complex, multi-hour tasks with hundreds of tool calls and minimal supervision. I used GPT-5.2 for this but I have no reason to believe that Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3 Pro would not be able to achieve the same thing - the only reason I haven't tried is that I don't want to burn another 4 hours of time and several million tokens on more runs.
• If you can reduce a problem to a robust test suite you can set a coding agent loop loose on it with a high degree of confidence that it will eventually succeed. I called this designing the agentic loop a few months ago. I think it's the key skill to unlocking the potential of LLMs for complex tasks.
• Porting entire open source libraries from one language to another via a coding agent works extremely well.
• Code is so cheap it's practically free. Code that works continues to carry a cost, but that cost has plummeted now that coding agents can check their work as they go.
• We haven't even begun to unpack the etiquette and ethics around this style of development. Is it responsible and appropriate to churn out a direct port of a library like this in a few hours while watching a movie? What would it take for code built like this to be trusted in production?

I'll end with some open questions:

• Does this library represent a legal violation of copyright of either the Rust library or the Python one?
• Even if this is legal, is it ethical to build a library in this way?
• Does this format of development hurt the open source ecosystem?
• Can I even assert copyright over this, given how much of the work was produced by the LLM?
• Is it responsible to publish software libraries built in this way?
• How much better would this library be if an expert team hand crafted it over the course of several months?

Tags: html, javascript, python, ai, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, gpt-5, codex-cli

2025 Word of the Year: Slop

Merriam-Webster’s human editors have chosen slop as the 2025 Word of the Year. We define slop as “digital content of low quality that is produced usually in quantity by means of artificial intelligence.”

Tags: definitions, ai, generative-ai, slop, ai-ethics

Copywriters reveal how AI has decimated their industry

It's a tough read. Freelance copywriting does not look like a great place to be right now.

AI is really dehumanizing, and I am still working through issues of self-worth as a result of this experience. When you go from knowing you are valuable and valued, with all the hope in the world of a full career and the ability to provide other people with jobs... To being relegated to someone who edits AI drafts of copy at a steep discount because “most of the work is already done” ...

The big question for me is if a new AI-infested economy creates new jobs that are a great fit for people affected by this. I would hope that clear written communication skills are made even more valuable, but the people interviewed here don't appear to be finding that to be the case.

Tags: copywriting, careers, ai, ai-ethics

If the part of programming you enjoy most is the physical act of writing code, then agents will feel beside the point. You’re already where you want to be, even just with some Copilot or Cursor-style intelligent code auto completion, which makes you faster while still leaving you fully in the driver’s seat about the code that gets written.

But if the part you care about is the decision-making around the code, agents feel like they clear space. They take care of the mechanical expression and leave you with judgment, tradeoffs, and intent. Because truly, for someone at my experience level, that is my core value offering anyway. When I spend time actually typing code these days with my own fingers, it feels like a waste of my time.

— Obie Fernandez, What happens when the coding becomes the least interesting part of the work

Tags: careers, ai-assisted-programming, generative-ai, ai, llms

How to use a skill (progressive disclosure):

1. After deciding to use a skill, open its SKILL.md. Read only enough to follow the workflow.
2. If SKILL.md points to extra folders such as references/, load only the specific files needed for the request; don't bulk-load everything.
3. If scripts/ exist, prefer running or patching them instead of retyping large code blocks.
4. If assets/ or templates exist, reuse them instead of recreating from scratch.

Description as trigger: The YAML description in SKILL.md is the primary trigger signal; rely on it to decide applicability. If unsure, ask a brief clarification before proceeding.

— OpenAI Codex CLI, core/src/skills/render.rs, full prompt

Tags: skills, openai, ai, llms, codex-cli, prompt-engineering, rust, generative-ai

One of the things that most excited me about Anthropic's new Skills mechanism back in October is how easy it looked for other platforms to implement. A skill is just a folder with a Markdown file and some optional extra resources and scripts, so any LLM tool with the ability to navigate and read from a filesystem should be capable of using them. It turns out OpenAI are doing exactly that, with skills support quietly showing up in both their Codex CLI tool and now also in ChatGPT itself.

Skills in ChatGPT

I learned about this from Elias Judin this morning. It turns out the Code Interpreter feature of ChatGPT now has a new /home/oai/skills folder which you can access simply by prompting:

Create a zip file of /home/oai/skills

I tried that myself and got back this zip file. Here's a UI for exploring its content (more about that tool).

So far they cover spreadsheets, docx and PDFs. Interestingly their chosen approach for PDFs and documents is to convert them to rendered per-page PNGs and then pass those through their vision-enabled GPT models, presumably to maintain information from layout and graphics that would be lost if they just ran text extraction.

Elias shared copies in a GitHub repo. They look very similar to Anthropic's implementation of the same kind of idea, currently published in their anthropics/skills repository.

I tried it out by prompting:

Create a PDF with a summary of the rimu tree situation right now and what it means for kakapo breeding season

Sure enough, GPT-5.2 Thinking started with:

Reading skill.md for PDF creation guidelines

Then:

Searching rimu mast and Kākāpō 2025 breeding status

It took just over eleven minutes to produce this PDF, which was long enough that I had Claude Code for web build me a custom PDF viewing tool while I waited.

Here's ChatGPT's PDF in that tool.

(I am very excited about Kākāpō breeding season this year.)

The reason it took so long is that it was fastidious about looking at and tweaking its own work. I appreciated that at one point it tried rendering the PDF and noticed that the macrons in kākāpō were not supported by the chosen font, so it switched to something else:

Skills in Codex CLI

Meanwhile, two weeks ago OpenAI's open source Codex CLI tool landed a PR titled feat: experimental support for skills.md. The most recent docs for that are in docs/skills.md.

The documentation suggests that any folder in ~/.codex/skills will be treated as a skill.

I dug around and found the code that generates the prompt that drives the skill system in codex-rs/core/src/skills/render.rs - here's a Gist with a more readable version of that prompt.

I used Claude Opus 4.5's skill authoring skill to create this skill for creating Datasette plugins, then installed it into my Codex CLI skills folder like this:

git clone https://github.com/datasette/skill \
  ~/.codex/skills/datasette-plugin

You have to run Codex with the --enable skills option. I ran this:

cd /tmp
mkdir datasette-cowsay
cd datasette-cowsay
codex --enable skills -m gpt-5.2

Then prompted:

list skills

And Codex replied:

- datasette-plugins — Writing Datasette plugins using Python + pluggy (file: /Users/simon/.codex/skills/datasette-plugin/SKILL.md)
- Discovery — How to find/identify available skills (no SKILL.md path provided in the list)

Then I said:

Write a Datasette plugin in this folder adding a /-/cowsay?text=hello page that displays a pre with cowsay from PyPI saying that text

It worked perfectly! Here's the plugin code it wrote and here's a copy of the full Codex CLI transcript, generated with my terminal-to-html tool.

You can try that out yourself if you have uvx installed like this:

uvx --with https://github.com/simonw/datasette-cowsay/archive/refs/heads/main.zip \
  datasette

Then visit:

http://127.0.0.1:8001/-/cowsay?text=This+is+pretty+fun

Skills are a keeper

When I first wrote about skills in October I said Claude Skills are awesome, maybe a bigger deal than MCP. The fact that it's just turned December and OpenAI have already leaned into them in a big way reinforces to me that I called that one correctly.

Skills are based on a very light specification, if you could even call it that, but I still think it would be good for these to be formally documented somewhere. This could be a good initiative for the new Agentic AI Foundation (previously) to take on.

Tags: pdf, ai, kakapo, openai, prompt-engineering, generative-ai, chatgpt, llms, ai-assisted-programming, anthropic, coding-agents, gpt-5, codex-cli, skills