Hosam Shahin

Hi product hunt !

We re currently building a multi-provider cloud alternative to Grokbot, and there s one feature we keep debating internally.

I recently came across a post on X saying that "if you're strong at execution but struggling to level up as a leader, you may not be simulating before communicating".

This caught my attention as I do simulate a lot of important conversations before they happen. I've recently used LLMs and interview coaching tools, and even vibe-coded my own tool to act as an AI coach. But my main issue is that every time I use any of these, I have to start over and rebuild the context of what matters and what not, and run into the same frictions again. That in addition to constantly tuning the often sloppy AI advice.

A user gives an agent a task. Maybe it needs to read invoices, update a CRM record, check an internal dashboard, or call a few APIs on their behalf. The easy model is to let the agent act with whatever access the user already has.

But I am not sure that makes sense once the user has a lot of authority. If I can delete a workspace, change billing, export customer data, or invite an admin, does an agent helping me with one task need access to all of that too Giving the agent its own identity and narrower permissions sounds safer. But then another question comes up: how narrow can those permissions be before the agent keeps hitting boundaries halfway through the task?

So I am curious how teams building agents are thinking about this today.

Does the agent inherit the user s authority? Does it get its own identity with access only to specific APIs or actions? Or are you handling this another way? And where do you draw the line between the user is allowed to do this and the agent is allowed to do this for the user ?