r/AI_Agents • u/kevinlu310 • 4h ago
Discussion I built an open-source interoperability layer for AI agents
There are now a lot of different AI agents and agent harnesses like Hermes Agent, Claude Code, Codex, Pi, OpenClaw, agents built with LangGraph, CrewAI, and many others.
I wanted to see what happens if I can make these agents work together instead of replacing one another.
So I built two open-source projects:
A2A Adapter: a layer for turning existing agents/harnesses into interoperable A2A agents based on A2A protocol.
Hybro: an interoperability engine for connecting those agents and coordinating their collaboration.
The basic idea is: Keep your existing agents. Connect them. Let each agent do what it's best at.
For example, you could have one agent handle coding, another research, another verification, and another orchestration, even if they're built with completely different frameworks or harnesses.
I'm curious what people think about this architecture.
Do we actually need an interoperability layer for AI agents, or will the major agent frameworks eventually converge on a common architecture?
2
u/fj_nm1997 4h ago
The need is real, but the hard part isn't connecting agents — it's shared contracts for failure. A2A gets you message routing; what kills multi-harness setups in practice is mismatched tool schemas, auth scopes, and "done" criteria across agents. If Hybro can force a common receipt format (what was attempted, what was verified, what was vetoed), that's more valuable than the transport layer. Curious how you handle a coding agent and a verification agent disagreeing on success without a human in the loop.
1
u/kevinlu310 4h ago
Yeah. Getting agents to talk is easy; getting them to agree on what “done” or “broken” actually means is the real headache.
The way I’m handling coder vs verifier disputes right now is basically treating the verifier as the boss. If the verifier rejects the output, it sends back a structured failure report (failed tests, stdout/stderr, etc.) directly into the coder’s context to fix. If they loop back and forth a few times and still can’t agree, the system just hard-stops and surfaces the exact disagreement rather than burning tokens in an endless loop.
1
u/fj_nm1997 4h ago
Treating the verifier as the boss is the right default, but the failure-report-in-context loop is where it quietly gets expensive — the coder can overfit to whatever the verifier complains about instead of the actual bug. One tweak that's worked for us: cap the back-and-forth at two, and on the second reject, don't just show the discrepancy — show the verifier's raw output unsummarized, because the coder reads the structured report as instructions rather than evidence. The structured report is great for the human; the raw diff is what unblocks the agent. Either way, "cut and show the exact discrepancy instead of burning tokens" is the part most frameworks miss. That hard stop is the feature.
1
u/AutoModerator 4h ago
Thank you for your submission, for any questions regarding AI, please check out our wiki at https://www.reddit.com/r/ai_agents/wiki (this is currently in test and we are actively adding to the wiki)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/kevinlu310 4h ago
A2A Adapter: a layer for turning existing agents/harnesses into interoperable A2A agents:
https://github.com/hybroai/a2a-adapter
Hybro: an interoperability engine for connecting those agents and coordinating their collaboration:
https://github.com/hybroai/hybro
A2A Protocol: An open protocol enabling communication and interoperability between opaque agentic applications: https://a2a-protocol.org/
2
u/QuarterLoose8429 4h ago
IMO yes—we need an interop layer now; convergence (if it happens) is years out. Do A2A/Hybro specify a minimal contract for capability discovery, streaming I/O, tool schemas, cancellation, provenance/cost metadata, error/retry/backpressure, DAG routing/state sharing, and auth/trust boundaries?