Word count: ~2200 words
Estimated reading time: ~8 minutes
Last updated: October 12, 2025
Is This Article for You?
If you’re an AI developer, product manager, or strategic thinker puzzled by current mainstream RAG architecture or curious about alternatives, then this deep dive into the “Agentic Retrieval” paradigm is for you.
Core Takeaways
✅ Paradigm Revolution: Why does “Agentic Retrieval” mark AI engineering’s shift from “structure-first” to “intelligence-first”?
✅ Ultimate Showdown: Deep analysis of benchmark results comparing RAG, long-context, and Agentic Retrieval.
✅ Mindset Shift: Why trusting AI’s own “intelligence” is key to success?
✅ Builder’s New World: How your role evolves from “data plumber” to “AI guide.”
1. The Thunderclap in AI Development
Hey, I’m Mr. Guo. With Claude 4.1 Opus already here and Gemini 3.0 about to launch, we’re in an era of explosive AI “intelligence” growth. Yet the internet is still flooded with RAG tutorials and recommendations. From my personal testing, RAG is actually the least effective AI knowledge base indexing path. For an e-commerce project’s AI SEO content generation agent, I used a strategy of directly embedding the knowledge base into the prompt — far better than RAG. Of course, this approach requires using high-intelligence AI models with longer context and well-developed attention mechanisms; forget about small models. Besides slightly higher costs, it beats RAG in every way. And now, for even larger content indexes, there are better options.
Recently, Boris, a core developer on Anthropic’s Claude Code team, proposed a “table-flipping” new idea through a widely circulated blog post: Agentic Retrieval.
This caused waves because the idea directly challenges RAG (Retrieval Augmented Generation), which we’ve treated as gospel for the past two years. While almost every company frantically competed in the vector database space, Boris asked the most fundamental question: Did we get it wrong from the very beginning?
2. Deconstructing the “Old World” — RAG’s “Original Sin”
Before declaring the “old king” dying, we must understand why he once claimed the throne. RAG was born to solve an era-specific problem: Past AI models weren’t smart enough and had limited context. It was like giving a bright but forgetful student a carefully crafted “open-book exam reference library.”
This approach was genius at the time, but its “original sin” was inherent: Complex, expensive, and distrustful of AI.
- Complexity: The entire RAG pipeline involves chunking, embedding, tuning — a complex tech stack where every step is an alchemy furnace.
- Expense: Database costs, tokens consumed during embedding, and human resources for system maintenance — all massive expenditures.
- Distrusting AI: RAG’s core philosophy treats AI as an “emotionless splicing machine.” We don’t trust it to understand the entire knowledge base, so we pre-digest everything for it.
This paradigm was necessary in the GPT-3.5 era. But with Claude 4.1 Opus demonstrating stunning reasoning capabilities today, has it become an “over-engineered” shackle?
3. New Paradigm Emerges — The Elegant Solution of “Agentic Retrieval”
Boris’s new paradigm has an elegantly simple core idea: Don’t treat AI as a machine — treat it like a smart human intern. You wouldn’t shred all company documents into paper scraps for them to match; you’d give them two things:
-
A file directory (map): A simple
llms.txtfile containing only file paths and high-quality content descriptions. -
A basic toolkit (permissions): Give the AI Agent basic file operation tools — listing files, reading files, and the powerful
greptext search command.
Now, when users ask questions, AI first reads the “map,” thinks for itself about which files might contain the answer, then uses tools to search and read. This process is almost identical to how human experts work. It discards complex external structures, instead relying on and activating AI’s own reasoning and decision-making capabilities. This approach is also more philosophically advanced — it’s essentially AI + tools Agent logic.
4. Ultimate Showdown: Benchmark Tests of Three Retrieval Paradigms
Talk is cheap. Is this “anti-traditional” method really better? A video presenter conducted benchmark tests using three different methods to have AI answer questions about their product documentation. The results were shocking.
| Method | Core Logic | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Traditional RAG | Build complex vector database indexes, retrieve via similarity matching | Mediocre, easily disrupted by “noise” paragraphs |
| 2. Agentic Retrieval | No indexing, just provide “map” file and basic tools, AI thinks and searches autonomously | Best initial results! |
| 3. Brute-force “Long-Context” | Dump all documents (~3M tokens) into the large model at once | Good results, but limited by knowledge base scale, context length, high token costs |
Agentic Retrieval won because of that high-quality “map.” Like an excellent research assistant, it pre-screens and annotates information source importance for AI, dramatically narrowing the search scope and letting AI’s “intelligence” focus where it matters most.
5. Builder’s New World: From “Data Plumber” to “AI Guide”
This experiment’s victory isn’t just a method winning — it’s an idea winning. Our role is shifting from “data plumber” to “AI guide.” It’s like teaching children: the old method had them memorize flashcards with all knowledge points; the new method teaches them to use the library, then lets them explore freely.
Core Skills for the New World:
-
Drawing excellent maps: Future knowledge base applications’ moat may not be vector database scale, but the quality of document descriptions in that
LM_TEXTmap file. -
Becoming excellent tool providers: Beyond
grep, what other simple, versatile, powerful tools can we give AI? Our job is to provide AI with a “Swiss Army knife,” not a fixed assembly line.
6. Conclusion: Letting Go Is Higher-Level Control
Agentic Retrieval’s emergence may not kill RAG overnight, but it undoubtedly sounds the horn for the old era’s end.
It reminds us that when tools (AI models) themselves have evolved, our philosophy for using them must evolve too. In the era of Claude 4.1 Opus and Gemini 3.0, continuing to use steam engine thinking to drive nuclear reactors is not just inefficient — it’s a massive waste of potential. Letting go, letting AI think and explore like a true intelligent agent, may seem like “losing control,” but is actually higher-level “control.” Because we’re no longer controlling its rigid paths, but its goals, tools, and leads. This is the future of AI development, and the most exciting era we builders are about to enter.
Found Mr. Guo’s analysis insightful? Drop a 👍 and share with more friends who need it!
Follow my channel to explore AI, going global, and digital marketing’s infinite possibilities together.