1. Home
  2. Investment Blog
  3. Large Action Models Open Source: A Guide to Building AI Agents

Large Action Models Open Source: A Guide to Building AI Agents

📅 6/21/2026 👁️ 2

Let's cut through the hype. You've heard about AI that can not just talk, but act. It can book flights, manage your investment portfolio, or handle customer service tickets from start to finish. This isn't science fiction anymore; it's the promise of Large Action Models (LAMs). And the most exciting part? The core technology is going open source. This shift changes everything for developers, businesses, and tech enthusiasts. Instead of waiting for a corporate API with limited access and high costs, you can now build, tweak, and deploy your own autonomous AI agents. I've spent months digging into these projects, testing their limits, and figuring out where they shine and where they stumble. This guide is about what you can actually do with open-source LAMs today.

What's Inside This Guide

What Are Large Action Models (LAMs), Really?

Think of a standard large language model (LLM) as a brilliant strategist. It can analyze a situation, suggest a perfect plan, and write a beautiful report about it. But it can't lift a finger to execute that plan. A Large Action Model is that strategist who also has hands. It perceives a digital environment (a website, an application interface, an API), plans a sequence of actions, and then executes them by controlling a cursor, typing, clicking, or calling functions.

The "large" part comes from the scale of training, often on massive datasets of human-computer interaction traces. The "action" part is the crucial difference. It's about agency.

A Simple Analogy That Stuck With Me

I was explaining this to a friend who's a trader. I said, "Your Bloomberg Terminal chat assistant (an LLM) can tell you the perfect time to buy a stock based on all news and charts. An LAM would be the assistant that logs into your brokerage account and places the trade for you, exactly as instructed, the moment the conditions are met." He got it immediately. The leap from analysis to execution is the entire game.

How Do Open-Source LAMs Actually Work?

Most open-source LAMs aren't single, monolithic models you download and run. They're frameworks or systems built around existing, powerful open-source LLMs. The magic is in the architecture. Let me explain.

You start with a capable model, like Llama 3, Mistral, or a fine-tuned variant. This model acts as the brain. The LAM framework then adds critical layers:

  • Perception Engine: This converts pixels on a screen, HTML elements, or API schemas into a structured description the LLM can understand. Some projects use computer vision, others parse the Document Object Model (DOM) of a webpage.
  • Action Planner & Sequencer: The LLM brain takes the goal ("book the cheapest flight to Tokyo next Monday") and the current state of the app, then breaks it down into a step-by-step action list: [1. Click on 'From' field, 2. Type 'JFK', 3. Click on 'To' field...].
  • Execution Module: This translates those high-level actions into low-level commands. For a web browser, this might be using Puppeteer or Playwright to simulate mouse clicks and keystrokes. For an API, it constructs the proper JSON payload and sends the HTTP request.
  • Memory & Feedback Loop: The system remembers what it did and observes the result (did a new page load? did an error pop up?). This feedback is fed back to the planner for the next step, creating a loop until the task is done or fails.

Frankly, the hardest part I've found isn't the AI logic—it's making this perception-execution loop robust enough to handle the messy, unpredictable nature of real software. A button's CSS class might change, a pop-up might appear, a page might load slowly. The best open-source LAMs are those that handle these "gray areas" gracefully.

Key Open-Source LAM Projects You Should Know

The landscape is moving fast, but a few projects have established themselves as foundational. Don't just look at GitHub stars; look at their architecture and what they're optimized for.

Project Name Core Approach Best For My Hands-On Note
Continue An open-source autopilot for coding tasks inside your IDE. It turns natural language prompts into edits, file creation, and debugging actions. Developer productivity, automating repetitive coding workflows. Incredibly smooth for boilerplate code. It struggles with complex, multi-file architectural decisions, but for daily grunt work, it's a game-changer.
OpenAdapt Records human desktop interactions (mouse, keyboard) to train AI agents to replicate workflows. Focuses on learning from demonstration. Automating legacy or desktop software without APIs, like ERP or CAD tools. The recording feature is solid. The replay accuracy depends heavily on the consistency of the UI. A fantastic idea for "unlockable" enterprise software.
OpenDevin Aims to be an open-source alternative to Devin, the AI software engineer. It can plan, write, and execute code to solve engineering tasks. End-to-end software project execution, research agents, complex problem-solving. Ambitious and rapidly evolving. Setting it up requires more effort, and it can get "lost" in long tasks. But when it works, it's jaw-dropping.
Agent Frameworks (e.g., LangGraph, CrewAI) Toolkits to build multi-agent systems where specialized agents (researcher, writer, executor) collaborate using LLMs. Building custom, complex agentic workflows from scratch. These are the building blocks. They give you maximum flexibility but also require you to design the entire action-perception loop yourself. Not a ready-to-run LAM, but the engine to build one.

Choosing one isn't about finding the "best." It's about matching the project's strength to your problem. Need to automate a specific web form? A framework with good browser control might be your starting point. Want to automate internal reporting from a dated database tool? A project like OpenAdapt that learns from screen recordings could be the only viable path.

Real-World Uses: From Automation to Investment

This isn't just academic. The move to open source puts powerful automation within reach for specific, high-value tasks. Here are concrete scenarios I've seen or built prototypes for.

Automating Repetitive Analysis & Reporting

Imagine you're an analyst. Every Monday, you log into five different dashboards (Google Analytics, a CRM, an ad platform), screenshot charts, compile data into a spreadsheet, and format a PowerPoint. A custom LAM agent can be trained to do this exact sequence. You're not just saving time; you're eliminating human error in data transcription. The agent logs in at 2 AM, gathers everything, and the report is in your inbox by 6 AM.

Intelligent Customer Onboarding & Support

A new user signs up for your SaaS product. Instead of just sending an email, an LAM-powered agent could guide them personally. It might detect they've uploaded a CSV file, then automatically open a tutorial modal for data mapping. If they submit a support ticket saying "I can't export my data," the agent could first check their account permissions, then if all is clear, perform the export for them and attach the file to the reply—all before a human sees the ticket.

Scenario: A Semi-Autonomous Investment Research Agent

This is where it gets interesting for the investment-minded. Let's build a hypothetical agent.

Goal: Monitor and report on emerging open-source AI projects with investment potential.

  • Perception: The agent is given access to GitHub Trending pages, AI subreddits, and Hugging Face model releases.
  • Planning: Every day, it scans these sources for new projects with keywords ("large action model," "agent framework," "autonomous").
  • Action: For each promising find, it clones the repo, runs a basic script to count stars, commit frequency, and contributor count. It then uses an LLM to summarize the README and assess the novelty of the approach.
  • Execution: It compiles a daily digest with project names, GitHub links, growth metrics, and a novelty score, saving it to a shared Google Sheet or sending a formatted Slack message.

This agent doesn't make investment decisions. It massively amplifies a human's ability to discover and triangulate signals—a classic case of man-machine teaming. The cost? Some cloud compute and your time to build the initial agent logic. The alternative is paying for a generic market intelligence SaaS or spending hours manually browsing.

The Hard Part: Deployment and Data Challenges

Here's the truth most tutorials gloss over. Getting a demo LAM to work in a controlled environment is one thing. Making it reliable enough for real business use is another beast.

The main hurdles aren't the models. They're the infrastructure.

  • Latency and Cost: Every step in an action loop often requires an LLM call. If your agent takes 10 steps to complete a task and each LLM call takes 2 seconds and costs a fraction of a cent, your task just took 20 seconds and cost a few cents. At scale, this adds up. Optimization is key.
  • Handling Failure: What happens when the agent clicks the wrong button? It needs a failure mode. Simple tasks might allow a retry. For critical tasks (like placing a trade), you need human-in-the-loop confirmation for certain steps. Designing these guardrails is 80% of the engineering work.
  • Security Nightmares: Giving an AI agent access to your browser session or API keys is a security risk. You need to sandbox its environment meticulously. An open-source project might not have enterprise-grade security out of the box.

My advice? Start with a single, well-defined, non-critical task. Automate your own weekly report before you automate a client-facing process. The lessons you learn about failure handling will be invaluable.

Why Your Data is More Important Than the Model

This is the non-consensus point I want to hammer home. Everyone obsesses over which base LLM to use (Llama 3 70B vs. Mixtral). In my experience, for building effective LAMs, the quality of your action data dwarfs the choice of model.

An off-the-shelf LLM knows grammar and general reasoning. To make it act proficiently in your specific application (your custom CRM, your proprietary trading platform), you need to show it examples of successful actions in that environment. This is where projects like OpenAdapt, which record human demonstrations, are so clever.

Think of it as training a new employee. You wouldn't just give them a philosophy textbook and point them at a complex software tool. You'd show them: "Here, to generate this report, you first click here, then select these filters, then export as CSV." That's action data. The more high-quality, annotated sequences of successful task completions you have, the better your LAM will perform, even with a smaller, cheaper base model.

Invest your time in curating or generating this data. It's the moat for your AI agent.

Common Questions About Open-Source LAMs

Are open-source LAMs reliable enough for business use yet?
For narrow, well-defined tasks with clear success criteria, absolutely. I've seen them reliably handle data entry, report generation, and basic triage. For open-ended, mission-critical processes with high stakes (like finalizing a legal document or executing a large financial transaction), they still require robust human oversight and confirmation steps. The technology is in the "augmentation" phase, not full "autonomy." Start with internal tools.
What's the biggest mistake people make when starting with an open-source LAM project?
They try to automate something that's already broken or poorly defined. If a human struggles to complete a task because the UI is inconsistent or the business logic is fuzzy, an AI agent will fail spectacularly. First, streamline and standardize the manual process. Document the exact steps. Then teach the agent. Automating chaos just gives you faster chaos.
How do I choose between a ready-made project (like OpenDevin) and building my own with a framework (like LangGraph)?
Use a ready-made project if your task closely aligns with its designed purpose (e.g., coding tasks for OpenDevin). You'll get a working solution faster. Choose a framework if your task is highly unique, you need deep control over the agent's logic and memory, or you're building a core competency. The framework route has a steeper initial learning curve but offers greater long-term flexibility and understanding.
Is the cost of running these models going to be prohibitive?
It depends on the task frequency and complexity. Running a massive 70B parameter model for every minor decision is expensive. The key is model orchestration. Use a small, fast model for simple perception and classification ("is the login button visible?"). Reserve the large, expensive model only for complex planning steps. Also, consider fine-tuning a smaller model on your specific action data—it will become more accurate and cheaper per call than a general-purpose giant.