A bit more context on how this works under the hood:
Right now the middleware sits as a translation/orchestration layer between agents.
Instead of forcing a shared schema, it:
validates payloads at the boundary
maps fields across schemas (configurable mappings)
preserves intent via a semantic layer (still evolving)
One thing that surprised me is how often agents “technically integrate” but still
fail at the intent level especially when message structures look similar but
mean slightly different things.
Still early, but I'm trying to figure out:
how much of this should be automatic vs explicitly defined
whether a “universal intermediate schema” is actually a bad idea
how people handle versioning across agent protocols
A bit more context on how this works under the hood:
Right now the middleware sits as a translation/orchestration layer between agents. Instead of forcing a shared schema, it:
validates payloads at the boundary maps fields across schemas (configurable mappings) preserves intent via a semantic layer (still evolving)
One thing that surprised me is how often agents “technically integrate” but still fail at the intent level especially when message structures look similar but mean slightly different things.
Still early, but I'm trying to figure out: how much of this should be automatic vs explicitly defined whether a “universal intermediate schema” is actually a bad idea how people handle versioning across agent protocols
Happy to share more details if useful.