Building a Tool Management API

Arthur Collé

In my ongoing research on multi-agent systems, I've been developing a specialized approach to tool management through a graph-based registry. This post dives deep into the technical implementation details and architectural considerations behind what I believe is a uniquely powerful way to handle agent coordination.

The Multi-Agent Coordination Challenge

When multiple agents need to work on a shared resource like a large knowledge graph or codebase, coordination becomes essential. Consider two agents modifying different aspects of a codebase: one handling CSS styling while another implements validation logic. These agents can work independently with minimal coordination. However, when two agents need to work on the same file simultaneously, more sophisticated locking and hierarchical retrieval mechanisms become necessary.

While a traditional relational database could handle these coordination tasks, I've found using a graph database (specifically Neo4j) offers compelling advantages. The key insight is treating the graph not merely as a data store but as the actual execution medium for the agents.

System Architecture: A Three-Layer Approach

My implementation consists of three specialized services working in concert:

1. Chat API: The user-facing interface

2. Tool Registry API: A central service for tool registration, discovery, and coordination

3. Integration Server: A service implementing the actual tool functionalities

Let's explore how these components interact to create a flexible, scalable system.

Embedding-Based Tool Discovery

One of the critical components of this system is the embedding service. I'm using BGE-M3 for text embeddings, though I could potentially incorporate CLIP embeddings for multimodal capabilities.

The embedding process works as follows:

POST /generate_embeddings
 
{ "texts": ["tool description 1", "tool description 2", ...] }

This creates resource nodes in the graph, each containing:

• Content (description)

• Embedding vector

• Unique ID

These embeddings enable semantic retrieval over tools. For example, when comparing an embedding of "R3" (a query) with other embedded content:

• "R3, 1, 2, 3" and "R3, 2, 3, 4" show high similarity scores

• "Sophie" (unrelated content) shows low similarity

This capability is crucial for intelligent tool selection based on natural language queries or task descriptions.

The Tool Registry: Beyond Simple Function Calls

The tool registry is the heart of the system. Rather than simply matching function names or using hardcoded tool selection logic, the registry stores rich metadata about each tool:

• Tool description (embedded for semantic search)

• Input schema specifications

• Output type information

• Action endpoint references

Each tool in the registry is defined with a schema that captures:

Tool
├── id: Unique identifier
├── description: Natural language description
├── action: Reference to implementation endpoint
├── arguments: Schema for input parameters
└── output_type: Information about return values

The schema-driven approach allows for sophisticated retrieval patterns and better coordination between agents.

Integration Server & Tool Registration

The integration server exposes endpoints that implement the actual tool functionalities. Here's where the magic happens with the decorator pattern:

@tools.endpoint
@app.post("/execute_code", response_model=ExecuteCodeResponse)
async def execute_code(params: ExecuteCodeParams):
    # Implementation code here
    return result

The @tools.endpoint decorator automatically registers this function with the tool registry API during deployment. This creates a structured model instance in the graph, making the tool discoverable by agents without manual registration steps.

On the integration server side, we establish the connection to the registry:

tool_api_url = "http://localhost:2016"
tools = ToolManagementAPI(tool_api_url)

This client communicates with the registry, synchronizing tool definitions and enabling seamless discovery.

Dynamic Tool Dispatching

Unlike systems that package tools as Python objects to be called directly by the agent, this architecture takes a different approach. When an agent needs to use a tool, the following happens:

1. The agent queries the registry API semantically to find relevant tools

2. The registry returns matching tools with their metadata

3. The agent selects the appropriate tool

4. The registry API dispatches the request to the integration server

5. The integration server executes the tool and returns results

This approach offers several advantages:

• Tools can be added, removed, or updated without modifying agent code

• The same tool can be implemented differently for different environments

• Tools can be versioned and managed centrally

Future Directions: Interactive Visualizations and Agent Collaboration

While the current implementation focuses on tool management, I'm working on extending the system with:

• Interactive visualizations for chain-of-thought reasoning directly in the graph

• More sophisticated coordination mechanisms for multi-agent collaboration

• Real-time monitoring of agent activities and resource usage

• Dynamic tool composition based on complex task requirements

As language models continue to improve, they'll eventually be able to generate optimal retrieval strategies on the fly, making the separation between the tool registry and user-facing chat systems even more valuable. The system can bootstrap an operational environment separate from the core query engine, enabling more complex autonomous behaviors.

Implementation Details

The system is currently implemented with:

• FastAPI for all service endpoints

• Neo4j as the underlying graph database

• Asynchronous request handling for improved performance

• BGE-M3 for text embeddings

• Claude 3.7 as the base language model

The integration server runs on port 2012, while the registry API operates on port 2016. In production, these run as publicly accessible services with proper authentication and rate limiting.

To summarize

The graph-based tool registry represents a flexible, powerful approach to agent coordination that scales well beyond traditional function-calling patterns. By treating tools as first-class entities in a knowledge graph, we enable sophisticated semantic retrieval and coordination mechanisms that would be difficult to implement in more traditional architectures.

This system provides a foundation for building truly autonomous agent systems that can discover, compose, and execute tools without requiring explicit programming for each possible task combination. It's a step toward more general-purpose AI systems that can operate with greater independence and flexibility in complex environments.

---

If you're interested in implementing a similar approach or have questions about specific aspects of the architecture, feel free to reach out. I'm continually refining this system and exploring new capabilities for agent coordination.

Watch the full live stream below! Thanks again for your patronage and interest.