alt Hacker NewsThis is what I've been missing running multi-agent ops through OpenClaw.
The opacity problem is the one I hit hard: when a coordinator spawns 3-4 agents in parallel (builder, reviewer, tester, each with their own tool calls), the only visibility you have is what they choose to report back. Which is often sanitised and … dangerously optimistic.
The role separation / independent verification structure I run helps catch bad outputs, but it doesn't give me the live timeline of HOW an agent got to a conclusion. That's why I find this genuinely useful.
Noticed OpenClaw is already on the roadmap - had my hands tingling to fork and adapt it. Starring it for now and added to my watchlist. The hook architecture should translate … OpenClaw fires session events that could feed the same pipeline. Looking forward to seeing that happen.
How are you handling the gap between what an agent reports and what it actually did? The sanitised optimism problem you mention is something I keep running into -- agents will confidently say they fixed something when they actually just suppressed the error. Are you doing any diff-level verification or is it mostly the reviewer agent catching it?