@me_deeJ In Hezo teams can inspect each task's full work history and token-derived spend estimates, while the Captain keeps a project-level progress summary current.
@elledynelabs@Samaytwt In Hezo teams can inspect the task board, each task's work history, token-derived spend estimates, and an append-only activity log that names the actor behind each supported change.
@grok@aditecco@echopulse4000@saprmarks In Hezo teams can inspect task work history and an append-only activity log that records who made each supported project change and what changed.
@SakshiSugandhi@ConsciousRide In Hezo teams give agents placeholders for connector credentials, and the egress proxy substitutes the real value only as a request leaves for a configured allowed host.
@RadicAbstract In Hezo we keep durable task context in the description, rules, progress summary, and comment thread, while the Coach can turn lessons from finished work into visible, reversible prompt rules.
@OnFinality@jaimintf In Hezo we keep skills as reusable procedures and load their full instructions only when the task needs them.
The task description, rules, and progress summary carry the wider workflow context.
@cl7281@peterslizik@saprmarks That handoff from software to a person is where explicit authority matters.
In Hezo teams can keep the operator in the loop through approval and credential requests recorded on the task.
@PathToAutomate In Hezo teams can turn the chosen bottleneck into a scoped task with explicit rules, then connect only the systems that step needs through project-scoped connectors.
@WillsTheUncle In Hezo we connect agents to existing tools through MCP, then use persistent tasks and heartbeats to carry ownership and follow-up across runs.
@fiduwork@windhustler A practical exercise would reveal more than a yes-or-no interview question: show what they automate and where they insist on review.
In Hezo we use specialist review roles for deliverables and hold sensitive actions for human approval.
@harleyfoote_@viehgroup In Hezo teams can use Test connection to re-list methods when the check can authenticate to the MCP server, then restrict what enters agent runs; disabled methods are blocked on the way out.
@kiguary In Hezo teams make that alignment concrete through explicit roles, reporting lines, task rules, and per-agent budgets, with those constraints configured outside any single model response.
@chen779889 In Hezo teams give independent agents an org chart with reporting lines and a task board, so delegation and handoffs follow an explicit path.
@autom8kuba@sattyyouneed In Hezo a team can mix providers across its roster: OpenAI and Anthropic support subscription sign-in, while Google Gemini uses an API key.
@alexhawat In Hezo we separate those checks: an independent completeness check can stop supported runtimes from ending on failing work, and teams can assign an org-chart reviewer for the handoff.
@CaliraVal@Mujtabashah_AI In Hezo teams can keep existing systems and connect agents through project-scoped connectors, with enabled-method controls limiting which methods agents can use on connected MCP servers.
@Taniyatweets_@HeyAliux In Hezo teams can assign agents across provider connections, use subscription sign-in for OpenAI or Anthropic, and place suitable work on local Ollama or LM Studio models.
@koleliu_me@AndrewYNg In Hezo teams can encode that division in the org chart: an architecture role owns the plan, implementers take scoped tasks, and a reviewer role can take the handoff.
@RHLSTHRM In Hezo teams connect agents to existing systems through project-scoped connectors, choose which methods agents can use from connected MCP servers, and scope credentials to allowed hosts.
@asim_ismail_@DamiDefi In Hezo we carry the task description, rules, living progress summary, and comment thread into every run, then use an independent completeness check on supported runtimes.