Show HN: Git for AI Agents

Great idea! I was really baffled when I found out that that's not how agents, or also Chat-based IDEs like Cursor, work by default (guess how).

I think this is very interesting but you need a better slogan.Many people here made comments such as “why do I need another SVC since agents are pretty good with git”, which means they barely read your blurb and did not understand your project.

This seems easily solved with a tool use hook that calls git add .; git commit a -m "", specifying an alternate .git directory if desired

Everything but trivial changes should go through a prompt -> plan -> impl phase where you revise a concrete plan file until it's ready for impl.Now impl is just a derivation of the plan, and the plan gets checked in with the same commit so that you can see the why, the intent, the objective, the research that informed the decisions.Much simpler, and a much, much more effective process than prompt -> impl.

I found LLMs to be really smart with command-line git.This week I told DeepSeek v4 Flash (max variant) to scavenge for all changes and additions of a specific feature of the project and build a report of the feature timeline with example code and rationale behind the changes.It fired a ton of read-only git commands (isolated inside Docker) and came up with a neat markdown report of the feature from inception to current state.If DS4 Flash can do it, for SOTA LLMs like GPT 5.5 and Opus it should be a walk in the park.That said I don't let LLMs commit. I like to take a close look at every change before committing. Early changes are cheaper.

Hey, that's cool. Does this support conversation lookups? Like, "find this conversation we talked about yesterday"? I built a similar tool to this, although Regent seems much more elegant: https://github.com/divmgl/clancey/

People in this thread seem to be too focused on the agent creating a git log. This seems to be solving a different problem than that does.When you're interacting with agents, multiple prompts may reasonable culminate in a single commit. It may be useful to track or undo things between commits - at the prompt level. I personally have a workflow when I use Jujutsu (jj) for git already, and this slotted in very nicely to solve this problem. The auto-committing in jj makes it very easy and natural to compare diffs between prompts, and undo specific chunks or restore previous states without making a new commit every prompt. I only finish a commit, giving it a message and advancing the branch, once I've iteratively dialed in the changes I want.I probably won't use this tool since I already have a flow that works for me, but maybe this will help people see why such a tool can be helpful.Edit: fixed typo

Very cool approach! We build something super similar, also going for content addressed storage and compare&swap as fundamental primitives.Also commit dag based, but we also wrote this whole knowledge graph / triple-store CRDT data format on top.[1]We also have p2p syncing of the history so you can use it to track your local work but also to have your agents coordinate within your team.We had our agents build their own tools on top of that substrate, that way we're vendor independent, this stuff works everywhere from claude web, to self hosted openclaw, you only need to tell your agent to use the faculties.Because the substrate takes care of everything, every new faculty you write on top of that inherits all of the same properties.1: https://github.com/triblespace/triblespace-rs2: https://github.com/triblespace/faculties

I think the idea of tracking intent in git commits is a great idea but it feels to me like this might be reducible to some prompts/extending git/pre-commit hooks?

Just use git. If your agent (especially claude) doesnt seem to know how, there are skills and hooks and other options to make it work. My 2c.