← Back to essays

Your Agent Instructions Are Rotting

·2 min read·By Ry Walker

Here is a failure mode we keep seeing across agent deployments. A new model ships. Nobody changes a single line of configuration. And suddenly agents start behaving strangely: spawning review sub-agents on more than half their runs, opening pull requests nobody asked for, in some cases merging them.

The cause is almost never the platform. It is the instruction files. Somewhere in an agents.md sits a line like 'thoroughly check all your work before finishing,' written a year ago for a model that needed the nudge. The new model, heavily post-trained to delegate to sub-agents, reads that same line as a mandate and goes wild with it. The instruction did not change. The reader did.

This is the part of agent operations that stays hard even as models get better. Instructions accumulate the way all configuration accumulates: someone adds a line to fix a problem, the problem goes away, the line stays forever. But every model generation reinterprets your entire instruction corpus. What was scaffolding for a weaker model becomes a liability for a stronger one. We have seen this on our own systems, and the counterintuitive fix is to cut instructions and watch performance improve, because the behaviors you were prescribing are now encoded in the weights.

The hard part is organizational, not technical. Nobody's first instinct is to delete instructions from something they still half-treat as a colleague. Adding a rule feels like progress. Removing one feels like risk. And evaluating an instruction set against a new model is genuinely expensive: you need benchmarks, you need runs, you need someone who owns the outcome. Right now almost nobody does this work, which is why I consider it a real competitive frontier. Your context and instructions are a maintenance surface that never stops moving, a point I made in two maintenance curves.

So here is the operating policy I would adopt today: every model upgrade triggers a pruning pass. Go through everything you set up, cut aggressively, and see what happens. The teams that treat instructions as perishable will outrun the teams that treat them as permanent.

Key takeaways

  • Instructions written for last quarter's model become active liabilities when a newer, more capable model reads them literally.
  • Teams that aggressively delete instructions often see agent performance improve, because newer models already encode those behaviors.
  • Evaluating your instructions against each new model generation is an unsolved problem and a real competitive frontier.

FAQ

Why would deleting agent instructions improve performance?

Because newer models are post-trained to do many of the things older instructions demanded. A line like 'thoroughly check all your work' that was harmless a generation ago can now trigger a model to spawn review sub-agents on half its runs. The instruction did not change. The reader did.

How should teams manage instruction files over time?

Treat them like code with a deprecation policy. Every model upgrade should trigger a pruning pass, and ideally an evaluation of the instruction set against the new model, not just the tasks. Default to cutting and observing rather than accumulating.

Tembo

Drowning in pull requests that need your review? Try Tembo Review, a beautiful AI-assisted PR review tool unlike anything you’ve used.