← All speakers

Bio, Work & Ideas

Jared Zoneraich

Conference affiliation: PromptLayer · 2025

On this page

Jared Zoneraich is a builder in residence at Cognition, where he works on the AI software engineer Devin, and the co-founder and former chief executive of PromptLayer. He has built products around two closely related challenges: helping teams control how language models behave and giving autonomous coding agents the tools to perform useful software work.

From developer tools to coding agents

Zoneraich founded the high-school hackathon hackBCA and studied electrical engineering and computer science at the University of California, Berkeley. He subsequently worked at Google, Facebook, and machine-learning infrastructure company Tecton, and was an associate at venture firm Alsop Louie Partners.

With Jonathan Pedoeem, he co-founded PromptLayer, developing a prompt registry and version-control system alongside tools for evaluation, request logging, experimentation, and production monitoring. The company announced a $4.8 million seed round in 2025. Zoneraich also maintains the PromptLayer Python package.

His product philosophy centers on collaboration between engineers and domain experts: lawyers, physicians, product managers, and other specialists should help shape prompts and evaluate outputs in fields where they understand quality better than the engineers integrating model APIs.

In 2026, Zoneraich joined Cognition to work on Devin, remaining a PromptLayer adviser as Pedoeem became chief executive.

What he believes makes agents effective

  • Simple agent loops, rigorous tools. Zoneraich favors a capable model repeatedly selecting tools and responding to their results over elaborate orchestration graphs. Exploration can remain flexible while sensitive operations and predictable deliverables are handled by tightly specified, independently tested tools.
  • Bash as a universal agent interface. His case for virtual-machine-backed agents emphasizes shell access, isolated execution, and persistent filesystems. Familiar command-line workflows let models inspect repositories, run tests, write temporary scripts, and recover from errors without requiring dozens of specialized integrations.
  • Context management through isolated sub-agents. Dedicated research, documentation, testing, and review agents can operate in separate contexts and return only relevant findings. Files, summaries, and selectively loaded skills keep the main agent focused during extended work.
  • Agent evaluation grounded in real work. Zoneraich prioritizes historical backtesting, end-to-end trials, targeted conversation snapshots, tool-call patterns, and LLM-as-judge evaluation over generic benchmark claims. His analysis of coding-agent architecture compares Claude Code, Codex, and other independently developed products without claiming authorship of them. One practical workflow has an agent inspect recent repository changes, update documentation, and submit a pull request for human review.

Read the topics behind these talks

1 conference talk

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

A coding agent can have a simple control loop while still needing careful tools, context management, permissions, and tests. The engineering lies in deciding where flexibility should end.

  • What made coding agents useful?
    0:47 ↗
  • From copying code to delegating work
    4:36 ↗
  • Repository instructions and one master loop
    10:12 ↗
  • Why keep dedicated tools when Bash can do so much?
    12:45 ↗
  • Structured plans without a hard-coded workflow
    17:55 ↗
  • Keep accumulated output out of the reasoning path
    20:52 ↗
  • Move rigor into tools, not every decision
    22:12 ↗
  • Adjust reasoning instead of adding another router
    25:58 ↗
  • A simple loop still needs execution boundaries
    27:23 ↗
  • Delegate the investigation, return the result
    28:51 ↗
  • Tune behavior and load specialized instructions
    32:03 ↗
  • Small edits and the limits of skill discovery
    34:46 ↗
  • Fewer tools, adjustable models, new primitives
    37:28 ↗
  • Different agents optimize different working relationships
    39:43 ↗
  • Codex: similar loop, different execution machinery
    43:03 ↗
  • Amp: improve the environment and start fresh threads
    44:25 ↗
  • Cursor: fast interaction and specialized training
    46:50 ↗
  • Evaluate outcomes, decisions, and execution traces
    48:42 ↗
  • Make exact output requirements testable
    51:41 ↗
  • Use the agent as a component in a larger workflow
    54:04 ↗
  • Where fixed sequences and direct APIs still matter
    57:25 ↗
  • Tests, specifications, and the limits of reverse engineering
    1:01:30 ↗

References