| name | iterative-retrieval |
| description | Pattern for progressively refining context retrieval to solve the subagent context problem |
Iterative Retrieval Pattern
Solves the "context problem" in multi-step workflows where you don't know what context is needed until you start working.
The Problem
When approaching complex tasks, you don't know:
- Which files contain relevant code
- What patterns exist in the codebase
- What terminology the project uses
Standard approaches fail:
- Send everything: Exceeds context limits
- Send nothing: Lacks critical information
- Guess what's needed: Often wrong
The Solution: Iterative Retrieval
A 4-phase loop that progressively refines context:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐ │
│ │ DISPATCH │─────▶│ EVALUATE │ │
│ └──────────┘ └──────────┘ │
│ ▲ │ │
│ │ ▼ │
│ ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐ │
│ │ LOOP │◀─────│ REFINE │ │
│ └──────────┘ └──────────┘ │
│ │
│ Max 3 cycles, then proceed │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Phase 1: DISPATCH
Initial broad query to gather candidate files:
const initialQuery = {
patterns: ['src/**/*.ts', 'lib/**/*.ts'],
keywords: ['authentication', 'user', 'session'],
excludes: ['*.test.ts', '*.spec.ts']
};
const candidates = await retrieveFiles(initialQuery);
Phase 2: EVALUATE
Assess retrieved content for relevance:
function evaluateRelevance(files, task) {
return files.map(file => ({
path: file.path,
relevance: scoreRelevance(file.content, task),
reason: explainRelevance(file.content, task),
missingContext: identifyGaps(file.content, task)
}));
}
Scoring criteria:
- High (0.8-1.0): Directly implements target functionality
- Medium (0.5-0.7): Contains related patterns or types
- Low (0.2-0.4): Tangentially related
- None (0-0.2): Not relevant, exclude
Phase 3: REFINE
Update search criteria based on evaluation:
function refineQuery(evaluation, previousQuery) {
return {
patterns: [...previousQuery.patterns, ...extractPatterns(evaluation)],
keywords: [...previousQuery.keywords, ...extractKeywords(evaluation)],
excludes: [...previousQuery.excludes, ...evaluation
.filter(e => e.relevance < 0.2)
.map(e => e.path)
],
focusAreas: evaluation.flatMap(e => e.missingContext).filter(unique)
};
}
Phase 4: LOOP
Repeat with refined criteria (max 3 cycles):
async function iterativeRetrieve(task, maxCycles = 3) {
let query = createInitialQuery(task);
let bestContext = [];
for (let cycle = 0; cycle < maxCycles; cycle++) {
const candidates = await retrieveFiles(query);
const evaluation = evaluateRelevance(candidates, task);
const highRelevance = evaluation.filter(e => e.relevance >= 0.7);
if (highRelevance.length >= 3 && !hasCriticalGaps(evaluation)) {
return highRelevance;
}
query = refineQuery(evaluation, query);
bestContext = mergeContext(bestContext, highRelevance);
}
return bestContext;
}
Practical Example
Task: "Fix the authentication token expiry bug"
Cycle 1:
DISPATCH: Search for "token", "auth", "expiry" in src/**
EVALUATE: Found auth.ts (0.9), tokens.ts (0.8), user.ts (0.3)
REFINE: Add "refresh", "jwt" keywords; exclude user.ts
Cycle 2:
DISPATCH: Search refined terms
EVALUATE: Found session-manager.ts (0.95), jwt-utils.ts (0.85)
REFINE: Sufficient context (2 high-relevance files)
Result: auth.ts, tokens.ts, session-manager.ts, jwt-utils.ts
Best Practices
- Start broad, narrow progressively - Don't over-specify initial queries
- Learn codebase terminology - First cycle often reveals naming conventions
- Track what's missing - Explicit gap identification drives refinement
- Stop at "good enough" - 3 high-relevance files beats 10 mediocre ones
- Exclude confidently - Low-relevance files won't become relevant