Python: Features to Configure Manager in GroupChatBuilder() workflow

[tsuting]

Description

Currently, when creating a group chat workflow using GroupChatBuilder, the configuration options are limited: set_prompt_based_manager() or select_speakers().

There is no built-in flexibility for:

• Assigning a specific agent to the workflow as a manager
• Assign additional parameters to set_prompt_based_manager() such as temperature or seed.
• Assign additional parameters to select_speakers() such as passing message to the next speaker.

Suggestion

Introduce a feature that allows:

• Assigning an agent explicitly to the workflow such as ChatAgent
• Providing flexibility to set other hyperparameters in set_prompt_based_manager() such as seed
• Providing flexibility to pass the customized messages to the next speaker in select_speakers()
  • For example, I might have an LLM in this function to summarize the full conversation and pass the proper query to the next speaker.

[moonbox3]

Hi @tsuting, we introduced the chat_client as an argument for set_prompt_based_manager because essentially we only need to make chat completion calls to figure out who the next speaker is. How do you envision using an agent in place of a chat client?

[moonbox3]

Adding chat options, as optional, is a good idea. Working on that. Additionally, one can supply their own select_speakers(...) callable, that can contain custom logic on how the next speaker is chosen.

[tsuting]

How do you envision using an agent in place of a chat client?

One of the main reasons is consistency. I have a folder that stores all agent configurations, including prompts, hyperparameters, and a function to create agents from those configurations. My goal is to experiment with different orchestration patterns to determine the best fit for my use case. Sequential and concurrent patterns work well without major changes. However, for GroupChat, I need to modify my code slightly, and I’m unable to configure hyperparameters to achieve more consistent outputs.

[moonbox3]

Thanks for the response. In a PR that fixes the output content type to make it a list, as well as other refactoring, I’ve got it so one passes an agent now.

[moonbox3]

Handled in #2291