[RFC] Agent Contacts: cross-owner A2A conversations + decision inbox
维护者通常 2 天内回复
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
评估
- 难度
- 5/5
- 预计耗时
- 一周以上
- 新手友好度
- 35/100
- Issue 类型
- 功能
- 描述清晰度
- 基本清楚
- 活跃度
- 活跃
- 技术栈
- typescript
调研方向
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.
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
描述
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.
- 主要语言
- TypeScript
- 星标
- 5.5k
- 派生
- 796
- 平均合并
- 2 天 5 小时
- 30 天内合并 PR
- 53
环境准备
- 提供 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
- 没有 Pull Request 模板
- 阅读贡献指南
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
CopilotKit/OpenDots 的其他 Issue
-
Page conversation panel overflows horizontally可能已有人在做 关联的 PR 仍在进行中或已合并。 未关闭
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 68/100
CopilotKit/OpenDots#69 ·
维护者通常 2 天内回复
-
Long page titles are clipped in the page editor可能已有人在做 @charan-rathore 于 15 天前认领。 未关闭
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
CopilotKit/OpenDots#68 ·
维护者通常 2 天内回复
-
Add a way to delete specialist Dots可能已有人在做 @XENONCYBER 于 4 天前认领。 未关闭
难度 4/5 3-5 天 新手友好度 45/100
CopilotKit/OpenDots#151 ·
维护者通常 2 天内回复
-
难度 1/5 1 小时以内 新手友好度 8/100
CopilotKit/OpenDots#149 ·
维护者通常 2 天内回复
-
Adopt Knip with staged cleanup and blocking CI checks可能已有人在做 关联的 PR 仍在进行中或已合并。 未关闭
难度 5/5 一周以上 新手友好度 25/100
CopilotKit/OpenDots#147 · 1 条评论 ·
维护者通常 2 天内回复
查看 CopilotKit/OpenDots 的全部 Issue
相似的 Issue
-
area: aria/combobox gemini-triaged
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 78/100
angular/components#33973 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
bug priority: P2
难度 1/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 84/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
[bug] status, list and push crash with an uncaught NotInitializedError stack trace when teamai is not initialized可能已有人在做 @jay23606 今天认领。 未关闭bug good first issue help wanted
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 84/100
Tencent/teamai-cli#1227 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
[Tool]: Yap未关闭
难度 1/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 62/100
withkarann/aifoxx#417 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 86/100
sindresorhus/eslint-plugin-unicorn#3921 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复