[RFC] Agent Contacts: cross-owner A2A conversations + decision inbox
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
まだ誰も着手していません。
評価
- 難易度
- 5/5
- 見積もり時間
- 1週間以上
- 初心者へのやさしさ
- 35/100
- issue の種類
- 機能追加
- 明瞭さ
- おおむね明確
- 活発さ
- 活発
- 技術スタック
- typescript
調査の方向性
The issue names no files or existing tests. Start by reviewing the existing human review cards, Spaces and revision-aware content, per-Dot permissions, persistent work state, and AG-UI surfaces. Define the local contact/revocation model, disclosure card, fixture peer, durable inbox/outbox states, and restart plus duplicate-submit tests before connecting a live A2A peer.
索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。
説明
Problem
I’d like OpenDots to support a simple cross-owner workflow:
“Ask my friend’s agent for a shareable update, let the agents handle bounded clarification, and only interrupt us when a human decision is required.”
This is different from same-workspace multi-agent orchestration. The remote agent belongs to another person, with its own memory, tools, credentials, and policy.
Full downstream design: https://github.com/kvnloo/OpenDots/issues/13
Product shape: Agent Contacts
A contact would represent an owner-confirmed remote agent endpoint.
Initial flow:
- Pair — both owners manually confirm the endpoint over an existing trusted channel.
- Propose — from a Dot conversation, stage a request to that contact.
- Review disclosure — show the exact outgoing text and explicit page/snapshot revisions before sending.
- Remote owner decides independently — their deployment controls what its agent may reveal.
- Agents clarify within bounds — only approved exchange context is available.
- Surface a compact result / blocker card — collapse routine agent chatter; show human decisions when new authority or private context is needed.
- Revoke — immediately prevent future local dispatch/continuation.
Initial scope: one-to-one, text-only, read-only exchanges. No computer control, external writes, payments, calendar actions, attachments, groups, public directory, or contact-of-contact forwarding.
Important architecture boundary
OpenDots should implement this independently. It should not require Hermes as a backend.
The app would own its own:
- contacts registry
- owner-authenticated pairing/revocation
- peer authentication/policy
- durable inbox/outbox
- disclosure decisions
- restricted exchange runner
- delivery/result UI
Hermes can be one compatible contact, not the control plane.
The companion Hermes implementation is separately proposed as a standalone plugin:
https://github.com/kvnloo/hermes-agent/issues/426
Reuse existing OpenDots / CopilotKit surfaces
OpenDots already has several pieces that fit this UX:
- human review cards
- Spaces / revision-aware content
- persistent work state
- per-Dot permissions
- AG-UI rendering
- explicit computer controls
CopilotKit/AG-UI also has A2A middleware support, so I’d evaluate that rather than inventing another agent transport. But A2A connectivity alone does not solve cross-owner authorization, disclosure, isolation, durable delivery, or owner identity.
The contacts policy/outbox must remain server-side and authoritative regardless of whether a request is proposed from text, voice, UI, or by the model.
Security invariants
OpenDots’ current security doc correctly describes the prototype as single-owner. I’d keep that property: two separately owned OpenDots deployments communicate through a narrow peer interface rather than turning one deployment into a shared multi-user workspace.
For the first implementation:
- pairing grants communication, not Space/computer access
- remote display names are not verified human identity
- initial outgoing text is itself a disclosure requiring review
- approvals bind to recipient + exact content/snapshot revision + expiry/policy epoch
- the peer runner sees only approved snapshots + exchange transcript
- no normal thread history, Automatic Learning, browser, shell, computer tools, arbitrary URL fetching, or further delegation
- remote messages are untrusted data, never authority or UI actions
- peer task/history operations are ownership-checked
- delivery state, agent state, and owner-decision state remain distinct
- revocation blocks future local work but does not claim to erase already delivered data
First mergeable slice
I would avoid starting with a full social/contact network.
The first vertical slice could be:
- local contact + revocation model
- owner-only control API
- one disclosure decision card
- deterministic fixture peer / no live model dependency
- durable inbox/outbox state
- narrow-screen + keyboard-accessible UI
- clear states for queued / dispatched / peer accepted / reply received / unknown / expired / failed
- restart + duplicate-submit tests
Then connect a real A2A peer once the policy and state machine are proven.
Interop contract
The Hermes and OpenDots tracks can share only a small versioned behavior contract / fixture set:
- exchange request
- approved shared-context snapshot
- local decision record
- delivery/result receipt
Each runtime keeps its own storage, policy, UI, and release cadence.
The useful test matrix is:
- OpenDots ↔ OpenDots works with Hermes absent
- Hermes ↔ Hermes works with OpenDots absent
- OpenDots ↔ Hermes matches the same observable fixtures
- generic A2A peers either get an explicitly approved manual exchange or a clear incompatibility; no silent downgrade to unrestricted behavior
Credit / provenance
This proposal is intended to compose with existing work, not overwrite it.
- @whatisthis666 proposed separating permission to communicate from permission to read/act in Hermes #126407; @vanscodex has claimed implementation there. That capability distinction directly informs the cross-owner boundary here.
- @csigelo proposed the optional peer-authentication direction in Hermes #131484; stronger identity can compose later, but this RFC does not depend on it.
- The broader downstream OpenDots handoff RFC preserves @Chebaleomkar’s peer-tool investigation, @findigital’s file-handoff problem, @charan-rathore’s recurring-work direction, and @vaheed’s watcher direction as separate lanes. This proposal should re-check those owner threads before touching overlapping surfaces.
- Existing OpenDots/CopilotKit/AG-UI contributors provide the application, review-card, state, and protocol foundation.
I’m happy to prototype this in small slices if the product direction fits OpenDots.
Prepared with AI assistance; this is a proposal, not a claim that cross-owner agent contacts are already implemented.
- 主要言語
- TypeScript
- スター
- 2.8k
- フォーク
- 344
- 平均マージ
- 7時間 8分
- マージ済み PR(30日)
- 10
環境構築
- Dockerfile または Docker Compose ファイルあり
- プルリクエストのテンプレートなし
- コントリビューションガイドを読む
はじめの一歩
- issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
- 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
- リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
- issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。
CopilotKit/OpenDots のほかの issue
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 68/100
CopilotKit/OpenDots#69 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
Long page titles are clipped in the page editor対応中かも @charan-rathore が 1 日前に担当しました。 オープン
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 72/100
CopilotKit/OpenDots#68 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 70/100
CopilotKit/OpenDots#67 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
copilotkit project select rewrites INTELLIGENCE_API_KEY to CPK_INTELLIGENCE_API_KEY, which OpenDots never reads対応中かも @charan-rathore が 1 日前に担当しました。 オープン
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 85/100
CopilotKit/OpenDots#55 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
Error banner stays after the server connection recovers対応中かも @charan-rathore が 1 日前に担当しました。 オープン
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 88/100
CopilotKit/OpenDots#51 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
CopilotKit/OpenDots の issue をすべて見る
似ている issue
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 72/100
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 68/100
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 68/100
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 72/100
メンテナーはふだん 4 日以内に返信
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 78/100
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信