DEV Community

Cover image for A Small Script That Refused to Stay Small
Tejus Gupta
Tejus Gupta

Posted on

A Small Script That Refused to Stay Small

It didn’t start as a project.

It didn’t even start as an idea.

It started as a small script I wrote because I didn’t feel like setting things up again.


The Kind of Work You Don’t Notice at First

When you’re building agents, the interesting part is never the beginning.

The beginning is boring.

You create a folder.
You set up a Python project.
You wire up uAgents.
You add logging.
You add Docker.
You add tests.
You configure formatting, linting, typing.

At first, I didn’t think much of it. This is just how things are, right?

But after the fifth, sixth, seventh agent, something felt off.

I wasn’t learning anything new.
I wasn’t solving new problems.
I was just repeating myself.

Quietly. Automatically. Almost on autopilot.


“I’ll Just Script This Part”

The first shortcut was harmless.

I wrote a small script to:

  • create a project folder
  • drop in a basic agent file
  • add a few configs I always used

Nothing fancy.
No CLI.
No tests.

Just something to save a few minutes.

It worked.

So I used it again.

And again.

And then I changed it slightly.
Then again.
Then again.

At some point, I realized something uncomfortable:

I was maintaining this script more carefully than some actual projects.


When the Script Started Asking for Structure

The script kept growing, but not randomly.

Every change came from the same question:

“What do I always end up fixing later?”

So I started baking answers into it:

  • better defaults
  • proper structure
  • real logging
  • Docker that actually works
  • tests from day one

Eventually, the script stopped feeling like a shortcut.

It started feeling like a standard.

And standards deserve structure.


Turning a Script into a Tool

That’s when I made a decision:

If this thing was going to exist, it should exist properly.

So I did what I usually do when I care about something:

  • split logic cleanly
  • separated prompts from behavior
  • added typing everywhere
  • wrote tests (a lot of them)
  • enforced formatting and linting
  • added CI
  • wrote documentation

Slowly, almost accidentally,
create-agentverse-agent took shape.


Why I Took Testing Seriously (Maybe Too Seriously)

This is a code generator.

If it breaks, it doesn’t just fail — it creates bad code.

That scared me.

So I tested everything:

  • CLI behavior
  • prompts
  • context handling
  • template rendering
  • filesystem output

Today, the project has:

  • 242 tests
  • 100% statement coverage
  • 100% branch coverage

Not because it looks good on a badge —
but because I want to trust it blindly.


What the Tool Is Today

Right now, create-agentverse-agent is a CLI that does one thing well:

It gives you a clean, production-ready starting point for building Agentverse-compatible agents.

With one command, you get:

  • a structured Python project
  • a uAgents-compatible agent setup
  • Docker & docker-compose
  • Makefile
  • tests
  • typing, linting, formatting
  • sensible defaults

It doesn’t try to be clever.
It doesn’t abstract your agent logic.
It just removes the boring parts.


What Changed for Me While Building This

Somewhere along the way, this stopped being about agents.

It became about how tools shape habits.

If the starting point is messy, everything downstream suffers.
If the foundation is solid, you move faster without thinking about it.

This tool reflects how I like to build software:

  • predictable
  • boring
  • well-tested
  • easy to reason about

The Current State (And Why I’m Happy With It)

The project is still young.
It’s still evolving.
But it feels stable.

Not because it’s finished —
but because its purpose is clear.

I don’t want this to grow endlessly.
I want it to stay focused.

A reliable beginning.
Nothing more.


What’s Next (Carefully)

If this grows, it will grow slowly:

  • template profiles
  • optional plugins
  • better non-interactive workflows

No magic.
No surprises.

Just less repetition.


Closing Thoughts

This tool wasn’t built because I wanted to build a tool.

It was built because I kept rewriting the same code —
and eventually, the code pushed back.

Sometimes that’s how good tools are born.

Not from ambition.
But from friction.


Links

Top comments (0)