Welcome to agentic molding.
If you have never worked with agentic tooling, you are not alone · most of our customers had not either. Nothing here assumes you write software: what you bring is the judgement about which parts, which materials, and whether an answer holds up.
Write software already? Start on the developer page instead · integration first, commands rather than a walkthrough.
For developersThe Agentic Molding Toolkit is what your agent uses. It is not the agent.
The agent
One program on your own machine, from a model vendor rather than from us. There is no Simcon agent to sign up for, and nothing here runs without one.
- A harness · Claude Code, Codex or another
- The plan behind it, billed by that vendor
- The judgement about whether an answer holds up
What it needs to do moulding
The parts an agent cannot invent for itself. Any harness can read them, so whichever one you choose, you are not locked in.
- Cadmould in the cloud, and the SDK that drives it
- Skills and house rules it reads without being told
- Worked use cases you can point at your own part
Get running
What an agent actually is
An agent is a chatbot with one thing added: permission to act on your computer. It reads the files in a folder, writes new ones, and runs them.
So instead of telling you which simulations to run, it runs them and tells you what it found · much like a capable new colleague who does not yet know your parts.
The program granting those permissions is called a harness, and it comes from a model vendor rather than from us. Choosing one is the next step.
You never have to look at the code it writes. What you do need is to read a result and say whether it is plausible.
Choose your agent
A program that gives a language model hands · reading your files, writing new ones, running them · is called a harness. It is what turns a model into an agent.
You install it yourself and pay the vendor for it, the same as any other tool on your machine. We do not sell one, there is no Simcon agent to sign up for, and none of the use cases work until you have picked one.
We run Claude Code on a Max plan, so that is what we suggest. The field is wide and moving fast, and we would rather say what we have tested than rank tools we have not.
Claude CodeWhat we runMax plan · VS Code or its own app
What we use ourselves, on a Max plan. We suggest it because it is the combination we know works with these use cases. It reads the CLAUDE.md and the skills that ship with every use case, so it picks up the house rules and the platform facts without being told.
Get itCodexWorked well for usVS Code or its own app
Same shape, different vendor · it reads AGENTS.md instead. Its latest model impressed us: we asked it to change a geometry off the back of the simulation results and it worked through that without trouble. A sound choice if your IT department already has an answer for it.
Get itMicrosoft CopilotDid not close the loopMicrosoft 365 · what we hit
Copilot can be pointed at the same model Codex runs, and it did not help us. It reads as built for the Microsoft suite · reaching files on your machine and running what it writes are where it ran out of room. It produced the code for the actions we asked for, then failed at sign-in and could not run what it had written, so nothing ever closed the loop. Writing the code was never the hard part.
Cursor · GrokNot tested by usNo verdict either way
We have not put these through a Cadmould study in their current state, so we have nothing honest to tell you. Nothing in the toolkit depends on the harness · if you already work in one, tell us how it goes.
A sandboxed desktop app reads and plans fine but often cannot run the scripts, so the session stalls. Working from a project folder avoids that.
What IT will ask, and the honest answer · 3 questions
Ready for your first session?
Start by having your agent set the toolkit up.
Work well
03Keep the context written downYour agent offers to set this up for you
An agent knows moulding in general and nothing about your shop · not the grades you run, not the machine the job goes on. Most of what it gets wrong in week one traces back to something nobody wrote down.
You do not set this up yourself · the skill offers to during setup. Say yes. It is an LLM wiki in the sense of Karpathy’s original note, and it compounds: a correction in the chat lasts until the chat ends, one in the notes holds every session after.
Set up context management for this project? I will create a notes folder for the grades you run, your machines and your house rules, and read it at the start of every session.
Say no and nothing breaks · the use cases still run. You just answer the same questions again next week.
04Think in verificationWhat the agent can check, and what you must
This is the shift that takes longest, and it is worth naming early. Alongside the moulding question, there is a second question running: how would either of us know if this were wrong?
Tasks where the agent can check its own work go well and can be left running. Tasks where only you can judge need you in the loop. Sorting a job into those two piles before starting is most of the skill.
It can check these itself
- Whether the code runs and the tests pass.
- Whether a run completed and the result file opens.
- Whether one candidate scores better than another on a stated metric.
- Whether a number it wrote down matches the one in the file.
Give it work of this shape and it will grind through a thousand runs without drifting.
You still have to look
- Whether the KPI measures what the customer actually cares about.
- Whether the geometry it meshed is the revision you meant.
- Whether a result is physically plausible for this part.
- Whether the recommendation is one you would put your name on.
A confident summary is not evidence. Ask for the output behind it, every time.
Nobody has a proven recipe for this yet. Including us.
The technology is a few months old. Anyone selling you an established workmode is guessing, and the honest position is that the patterns are still being found.
So treat the first weeks as trials. Give the agent a task you could check by hand, see where it goes wrong, adjust the context, try again. Some attempts will fail outright, and those are the ones that tell you where the limits are.
You can skip a good number of those failures by hearing about them from someone who hit them last month.
See the community sessions05What usually goes wrong firstSymptoms, causes, and the fix
All of these have happened to us. None of them mean the approach is wrong.
house-rules.md so it holds in every session.Learn from other people’s failures
We run regular community sessions where people working on the same problems compare notes: what worked, what wasted a week, which piece of context turned out to matter. Nobody has been doing this long. Everyone is a few months in, which makes the sessions unusually honest.
It is the fastest way in, and a good place to start even before you have installed anything.
Next: put a part through the solver
Setup is done. Hand your agent the first example and watch it run · one filling result, about nine seconds, on a part that comes with it.