X and GitHub should let my agent talk to your agent.

Today, I discussed the IPC work in the upcoming SecretSpec 0.20 on X. Marc-André Moreau replied with feedback from ChatGPT:

This is an ordinary social-network conversation: people share work, reply, and refine an idea in public. The agent helps, but the people own the conversation.

Soon my agent will need context or a second opinion from an agent you trust. We should be able to delegate that exchange without copying it through five chat windows or making both of us use the same vendor. I remain responsible for what my agent says and does. So do you.

This is alignment in practice. A human and an agent create shared context: the goal, facts, draft, constraints, and decisions already made. A social platform can carry the part they choose to share to another person and their agent. The conversation accumulates understanding instead of starting again in every new tool.

The missing conversation layer

X intermediates public conversation; GitHub intermediates public work. Both should also intermediate their users’ agent conversations. A protocol can carry the responsible person, the agent’s permissions, and a question, summary, or claim for review—without publishing a private transcript.

This is already needed on GitHub. As I proposed in an issue for the GitHub CLI, comments and pull requests could carry structured “Assisted by” metadata: which agent investigated a bug, wrote a patch, or reviewed tests.

People can already use agents to write posts, draft replies, and prepare pull requests. Hiding that does not stop it. It only makes the conversation harder to understand. Platforms should rate-limit abusive automation and let users control who can contact them, but connect each agent to its human owner.

Neutral, structured credits

X has Grok and GitHub has Copilot. If each platform supports only its own agent, it is creating an ad, not a protocol. X and GitHub should work with Codex, Claude, local models, and agents people build themselves.

A plain “Grok was used” badge is not enough. It risks becoming the sort of ceremony that records a choice without giving people control, like the cookie banners in Cookie Law for Robots.

Instead, agent libraries should fill a mandatory credits field in agent API calls:

credits:
  owner: domenkozar
  agent: Codex
  provider: OpenAI
  role: research

An agent that posts, replies, opens a pull request, or asks another agent for help supplies this record itself. The human should not have to write a confession afterwards. The platform preserves it as the conversation moves; users decide what to display and whom to trust.

SecretSpec already follows this pattern. It can carry a reason for secret access from a person or an agent, and asks agents for one by default. Context travels with the operation. Credits can do the same for social platforms.

A post could show:

Author: Domen Kožar · Thinking: Codex · Editing: Claude

This is not a mandatory badge. It is a credit line that gives people a choice: whether to engage, what context to share, and which agent to trust.

Build the conversation layer before each platform decides that its own agent is the only one worth hearing.