Launched this week
Vokal
A collaboration space for 10x teammates with their Al agents
1.1K followers
A collaboration space for 10x teammates with their Al agents
1.1K followers
Your Codex and my Codex can’t talk, so we play human telephone in Slack: copy prompts, paste summaries, ask for reviews, and lose the run. Vokal brings 10x teammates and their agents into one live workspace in minutes, whether they run local Codex, Claude Code, or Hermes — or in the cloud. Name your agents, give them roles, access, and memory, and work will happen in a shared collaboration space instead of through copy-paste handoffs.
DeckSpeed
The emphasis on visible work is important. If agents are doing meaningful tasks, teammates need goals, blockers, outputs, and review history.
Vokal
@hanzhizhang0405 Exactly. Once agents move from 'personal assistant' to doing real team work, visibility becomes part of the workflow, not a nice-to-have.
For each meaningful agent run, the team should be able to answer: what was the goal, what context was used, what changed, where is it blocked, who reviewed it, and what should be remembered for next time.
That is the layer we’re building Vokal around.
the copy-paste handoff between slack and whatever agent you're running is so real. half my team's context gets lost in that gap. one workspace where the agents and humans are in the same thread makes way more sense than the screenshot-in-slack workflow we're doing now
Vokal
@tina_chhabra Exactly. The screenshot-in-Slack workflow loses the important parts: the prompt, source context, intermediate reasoning, tool actions, corrections, and why the final output changed.
Our goal with Vokal is to make the agent run itself part of the team thread, not something that happens elsewhere and gets summarized afterward.
So humans can ask, agents can work, teammates can add context, and the handoff/review stays in one place.
Jinna.ai
Congrats on the launch! I’ve seen a few projects like these, and my experience tells me that indeed, keeping team in sync becomes a bottleneck in this fast AI dev tooling world.
How does your tool approach integration with team’s agents, for instance Claude/Code? Does it replace the «brain» of that tools with its own, or integrates it via MCP/other means, or both?
Vokal
@nikitaeverywhere Great question! you own agent memory stays where it is. Vokal just provides ACP+MCP to integrate your local agents with the team.
SocialEcho 2.0
How would a support team use this when a customer issue needs to become an engineering task?
Vokal
@eexlkuang_se A common flow is: support drops the customer issue into a Vokal channel, then asks a support agent (bringing up an agent into vokal is just one click, a lot of product development agent profiles are already pre-trained and ready to use) to summarize the symptoms, customer impact, repro steps, relevant screenshots/logs, and open questions.
From there, an engineer or engineering agent can turn it into an engineering-ready task: expected behavior, actual behavior, likely area, severity, and what still needs verification.
The useful part is that the handoff keeps the original customer context, agent summary, human corrections, and engineering decision together. So support is not just forwarding a messy thread; they are handing engineering a reviewed problem statement with context attached.
Vokal
@eexlkuang_se A practical flow is: support brings the customer issue into a Vokal thread with the relevant context — customer impact, screenshots/logs, repro notes, and any support conversation details.
Then a support or triage agent can turn that messy context into an engineering-ready brief: what happened, expected vs actual behavior, affected customer/user segment, severity, repro steps, open questions, and links to evidence.
From there, an engineer or engineering agent can create/update the task and continue in the same thread. The main value is that the customer context, support judgment, agent summary, engineering follow-up, and final decision stay together instead of getting reduced to a vague ticket like “customer says X is broken.”
Mapify
Does Vokal read all company data by default, or can teams scope what each agent sees?
Vokal
@xeasonchan there are permission and access control on both sides (company data, as well as agent permissions), but by default, the system encourages sharing (especially for read access) so that agents automatically get team context and be smart at what they do.
Vokal
@xeasonchan No, Vokal is not meant to give every agent blanket access to all company data by default.
Each agent has its own identity, owner, channel/DM membership, behavior settings, permissions, toolsets, local folder grants, and connected-app grants. So teams can keep an agent in a specific support or engineering channel, give it only the app/file access it needs, and use private channels when the context should stay limited.
There is baseline access so an agent can function inside Vokal, like reading messages delivered to it, replying, and resolving workspace context. But the design is explicit, reviewable scope rather than “everything unless you opt out.”
Is this more like a peer programming where coworkers can prompt / work with AI agent within the same context ?
Vokal
@vitan_baddam Yes, that’s a good way to think about one part of it. For engineering, it can feel like peer programming with AI agents: teammates can work in the same channel/task context, add missing context, redirect the agent, and review the output together.
But Vokal is broader than coding. The same shared context can be used for product specs, support handoffs, launch work, research, ops, and follow-ups.
The key difference from a private AI chat is that the prompt, sources, agent run, decisions, corrections, and review trail stay visible to the team instead of living on one person’s laptop.
@zhen_han While working with claude over the past few months, I always wondered if someone could pick up where I left off or someone could review and test the product I am developing. Sounds like Vokal is addressing this problem, will be exploring more !
Vokal
@vitan_baddam Great, feel free to book a demo session with me on vokal website https://vokal.team/
What does human review look like before an agent output ships?
Vokal
@joe_0417 For us, human review should happen before the final output, not only after an agent has produced a PR or finished artifact.
In Vokal, review starts in the shared thread: humans can check the goal, source context, assumptions, acceptance criteria, agent plan, intermediate output, tool actions, risks, and open questions while the work is still moving.
A reviewer or QA agent can do a first pass, like checking against criteria or listing missing evidence. But the human/team still makes the judgment call: approve, redirect, ask for more proof, narrow scope, or stop the work.
The key is that review becomes part of the live human + agent workflow, instead of a late-stage Slack paste or GitHub PR surprise.