It has all the trappings of NIH syndrome.
Reinventing the wheel without explaining why existing tools didn't work
Creating buzzwords ("blueprints" "devboxes") for concepts that are not novel and already have common terms
Yet they embrace MCP of all things as a transport layer- the one part of the common "agentic" stack that genuinely sucks and needs to be reinvented
They mention "Why did we build it ourselves" in the part1 series: https://stripe.dev/blog/minions-stripes-one-shot-end-to-end-...
However, it is also light on material. I would also like to hear more technical details, they're probably intentionally secretive about it.
But I do, however, understand that building an agent that is highly optimized for your own codebase/process is possible. In fact, I am pretty sure many companies do that but it's not yet in the ether.
Otherwise, one of the most interesting bits from the article was
> Over 1,300 Stripe pull requests (up from 1,000 as of Part 1) merged each week are completely minion-produced, human-reviewed, but containing no human-written code.
I was an early MCP hater, but one thing I will say about it is that it's useful as a common interface for secure centralization. I can control auth and policy centrally via a MCP gateway in a way that would be much harder if I had to stitch together API proxies, CLIs, etc to provide capabilities.
resume driven development
>Reinventing the wheel without explaining why existing tools didn't work
Won‘t that be the nee normal with all those AI agents?
No frameworks, no libraries, just let AI create everything from scratch again
What are the common terms for those? (I have heard "devbox" across multiple companies, and I'm not in the LLM world enough to know the other parts.)