Openbase - Manage your team of AI agents by voice, from anywhere
by•
Openbase lets you manage a team of AI coding agents by voice, from anywhere; no screen, no desk.
AI agents can work async, but supervising them still pulls you back to a laptop. OpenBase fixes that. Dispatch tasks, steer agents mid-work, and approve changes just by talking. The agents write code, control your computer, open PRs, commit and push; you stay in control from your phone.
Works across providers and syncs to your machine, so you pick up at your desk right where you left off.
Replies
Hey Product Hunt 👋 I'm Lucas, co-founder of OpenBase.
We built this because we live in Claude Code and Codex all day, and kept hitting the same wall: the agents could keep working while we were away, but supervising them meant going back to a laptop. Every time. So we built the thing we wanted; a way to run our agents by voice, from anywhere.
You talk, the agents build, you approve the important calls out loud. Kick off a feature from a walk, steer it, approve the PR, all without a screen. It works across providers and syncs back to your machine so nothing's lost when you sit down.
It's open source (AGPL-3.0) and in private beta/waitlist today.
Try it out here: https://openbase.cloud
@lucaszhao Congrats looks awesome , i'll check
@lucaszhao Quick question: since you’re enabling voice-driven approvals and remote steering of agents, how do you handle auditability, security, and accidental voice commands? Specifically, what safeguards do you recommend or have built in to prevent unintended actions and make approvals legally and operationally traceable?
@lucaszhao @swati_paliwal Sensitive actions require explicit approval, and each approval is logged in the thread with the action and outcome for traceability. You can also set a private safety word to reduce accidental voice triggers, while we continue strengthening speaker verification and replay protection.
@lucaszhao The phone approval flow is the part I would want to stress-test. If an agent is about to commit, push, or open a PR from a voice command, do you keep an audit trail of the exact instruction plus diff summary before approval? That would make this a lot easier to trust outside toy repos.
Love the idea! I even hoped for something quite similar about a week and a half ago while at work. The 'no screen, no desk' part hit me harder than you probably intended, because I'm not a developer.
I work in a bakery. Factory rules mean my phone stays in the locker room, and my hands are busy for the whole shift. In the week before I launched my own app, some of my best thinking happened while I was working, ideas, prompts, things I wanted to try, all of it fully formed in my head and completely stranded until I clocked out or took a break. I kept thinking how good it would be to just talk it into a headset and have the work already moving by the time I got home.
The honest reason I haven't tried agents yet is different from the reason you're solving for. It isn't that supervising pulls me back to a laptop. It's that I don't understand them well enough to trust one unsupervised, and I'm afraid of something getting deleted or overwritten without me noticing until much later.
So my question is about the approval layer. When an agent is working and I'm not looking at a screen, what actually stops a destructive change from going through, and how much does it explain out loud before it commits? For someone like me, that answer matters more than the speed.
@satchmo_saunders Yeah of course! So anytime there is a potentially dangerous change the agent (or super agent) is trying to make, it will pause its work and explain to you what it is trying to do. It will tell you "if you'd like to continue, say 'yes proceed'".
If the agent's explanation is not clear enough, you can continue probing and asking it questions about the change until you fully understand, then say "yes proceed". Of course, it will not perform the change without those words, so you don't have to worry about the agent making highly destructive changes without your knowledge.
@lucaszhao That's exactly the guarantee I was missing, thank you. The fact that it stops and waits for specific words, rather than a generic confirmation makes a real difference, and being able to keep probing until I actually understand the change is the part that would make me trust it.
One thing I'm curious about from a noisy environment: how sensitive is it to mishearing? My workplace has machinery running constantly, and I'd want to know that 'yes proceed' can't be triggered by background noise or a half-similar phrase in a conversation happening next to me. Is there anything guarding against a false positive on the approval?
@satchmo_saunders For the most part, it's pretty difficult for background noise to mimic the words "yes, proceed" exactly enough for the AI to pick it up, and also similar phrases in conversations will most likely be too far away for your headset mic to register as well.
@lucaszhao That makes sense, and good to know the mic proximity does most of the filtering.
One thing that might be worth testing though: my workplace isn't English speaking. Everyone around me speaks Finnish, and the Finnish word for excuse me is 'anteeksi,' which comes out close enough to 'yes please' that I noticed it myself. It's also a word people say constantly on a factory floor, every time someone squeezes past someone else.
Not saying it would trip your exact phrase, but it made me wonder how the approval word holds up in a room where the background language isn't the one it's listening for. Might be worth throwing a few non-English work environments at it before someone finds out the fun way :D
@satchmo_saunders This is such a thoughtful use case, and you’re right: trust matters more than speed here.
Today, Openbase does NOT let the agent silently approve its own sensitive actions. When it reaches something like a shell command, file change, commit, or push that requires permission, it pauses and asks you before continuing. It tells you what action it wants to take and why, and you can approve verbally with a "safety word" or reject it by voice.
The part we’re still improving is how much context can be safely summarized without a screen, especially for larger changes. We want the spoken approval to be specific enough that you know what may be changed, not just “approve this command.” For someone like you working with your phone in a locker, we may also need a stricter mode that queues risky actions until you can review them later.
If that queue mode existed, what would you want waiting for you after your shift? A quick spoken recap of everything the agent accomplished, or a written list of anything still waiting on your approval?
@zoky_zhou Written list, without hesitation.
When I get to my phone I have about five minutes. Text lets me scan the whole thing in seconds, stop on the one item that worries me, and read it twice if the wording is ambiguous. A spoken recap makes me sit through everything in order at its own pace, and if I miss a detail I have to hunt back through audio to find it. My break room is also loud enough that listening to anything is a small ordeal.
One request if you build that queue: sort the risky items to the top, separate from what the agent already finished on its own. What I need to know first is what is waiting on me and whether it could break something, not a chronological account of the shift. The accomplishments summary is nice, but I'd read it second.
If that mode existed I'd genuinely try it. Pause and explain, plus a review queue, is the first version of this I could imagine trusting :)
@satchmo_saunders This is incredibly helpful. Thank you, we'll definitely keep this in mind as we build the review queue!
@zoky_zhou Happy to help. If you do build the queue mode and want someone to test it in a genuinely hostile environment, factory noise, five minute breaks, no screen for hours, I'm your guy. Good luck with the rest of launch day
How you handle approvals for changes that could affect multiple files. Is there a way to quickly review the important parts before saying yes? I'd also love to see short voice summaries of what each agent finished since the last check-in.
@freya_jensen_d Both of these are central to how we’re thinking about approvals.
For multi-file changes, you don’t have to approve blind. The related diffs are grouped together in the Thread, so you can review the affected files and jump into the parts that matter before approving. Sensitive actions like writes, commits, and pushes can still require their own approval rather than being covered by one blanket yes.
And yes, short voice recaps of what each agent finished since your last check-in are exactly where we’re headed. The goal is to let you catch up hands-free, then ask for more detail (i.e. a step-by-step summary of everything it did) only where you need it.
The idea of kicking off a feature while walking and coming back to a ready PR sounds both extremely useful and slightly dangerous :))
@andrasczeizel Haha we've made sure to have a lot of guardrails with Openbase so hopefully it's more so the former
@etiennegarcia Thank you Etienne!
Good to know it fails safe rather than proceeding on a guess - that queue-and-resume behavior is exactly what I'd want if I'm the one walking around unable to babysit the connection. Thanks for the detail.
@thys_beesman Yeah good question! So we have a view called "Threads" and there you can see the agent's transcript and code diffs across multiple files.
Currently with our hosted version, it's a free trial then $20/month for the voice/TTS models, but we also offer a dev pathway where you can clone our git repo and run a script, which will automatically configure to free local models such as Kokoro.
@thys_beesman the instructions on how to setup the developer pathway is in our Github repo readme.md
Congratulations on the launch, Lucas. Voice-based supervision is an interesting answer to the problem of agents working asynchronously while humans remain tied to a screen. How do you handle approval boundaries for sensitive actions such as commits, pushes, and pull requests?
@russlan_ramdowar Thank you Russlan! In terms of approvals, our agents never commit, push or open a PR automatically; it always makes the local change first, lets you review, then you can tell it to perform the sensitive action. This is unless of course, you instruct it to automatically commit/push/open a PR.
Any plans to let teams create reusable voice workflows for common development tasks? That could save a lot of repeated instructions.
@aiden_pearce7 Yes! That's exactly what we're building with Skills. A Skill captures a reusable workflow, so instead of re-explaining the same process every time, you can just invoke it by name. Think "run my pre-PR checklist," "set up a feature branch the way our team does it," or "prepare this release." Teams will also be able to share Skills, so everyone can reuse the same workflows.
Out of curiosity, what's the first workflow you'd turn into a Skill? We're genuinely using feedback like this to decide what to build next.
Sign me up, this is actually a dream! Hopefully I can find time to download this to try it. I like it because I used to drive around calling my human assistants to help me do work as I was driving long distances. This is really useful for people who drive long distances and are business people or people with work that requires computers. Maybe even artists can use this like music industry people.
@saderod Thank you Stefhon!