Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

great use case for multiplayer agents is to "pre-compute" work, eg pull request reviews for example, at OpenClaw🦞 we built a dashboard + automation to: - monitor community discord for PR review requests - assign to a maintainer - kick off a team session automatically

20,576 views • 28 days ago •via X (Twitter)

10 Comments

brian douglas's profile picture
brian douglas28 days ago

@openclaw Looking good

ErenHe's profile picture
ErenHe28 days ago

@openclaw Pre-computing is definitely the best way to absorb agent latency. How do you guys handle debouncing when authors push follow-up commits right as the team session kicks off?

Chen's profile picture
Chen28 days ago

@openclaw I'm taking notes man

Lord Seagull's profile picture
Lord Seagull27 days ago

@openclaw I'm even thinking to suggest this to my work 😅 Don't think I would ever get this through, but I find this pretty cool

John Rood's profile picture
John Rood28 days ago

@openclaw the missing piece is a freshness boundary. every pre-computed review needs to pin the exact commit and policy snapshot it saw, or the dashboard quietly turns stale work into confident action items.

Wukong's profile picture
Wukong26 days ago

@openclaw Pre-computing the coordination work is a strong pattern: the agent handles detection and routing, while the maintainer still owns the review. That keeps automation from becoming another queue to babysit.

Felice da Vinci's profile picture
Felice da Vinci28 days ago

@openclaw Preload the diff, failing tests and risky files before assignment; the maintainer should arrive to decisions, not archaeology. The bot can queue patiently; it has no weekend plans.

Ben Liu's profile picture
Ben Liu28 days ago

@openclaw Pre-computing review is a good fit because the maintainer still owns the call. A short diff-aware brief makes the human pass faster without adding another vote to the thread.

Jak Myers's profile picture
Jak Myers28 days ago

@openclaw Pre-compute works when the agent's output carries its own evidence. A review that records what was checked and what was skipped lets the maintainer audit the review instead of the PR. Without that trail they either redo the work or rubber-stamp it, and neither one is a review.

Matías Matthews ✈️ Backplane's profile picture
Matías Matthews ✈️ Backplane28 days ago

@openclaw The underrated bit is assigning a maintainer. A review can be excellent and still go nowhere if nobody owns the next step.

Related Videos