> My household runs a shared agent on Telegram, my partner and I can do everything, calendar, purchases.
Alright, so already here you have permissions, per user, it sounds like, as you both have different chat sessions, I'm assuming?
Associated with those chat sessions, is the user, and what tools (via MCP or passed manually to the model, or whatever) it has access to at that moment.
Already here you have what's needed 100%? Why would you give/remove access via the prompt, I don't think anyone use LLMs like that in the first place?
Adding tool calls/responses is already doing something more, but instead of doing less, you suggest piling something on top of that?
Sorry if I seem slow, I'm just trying to understand what problem you're actually trying to solve here, as it sounds to me you're trying to solve something you could have just not done to begin with, then you don't have that problem anymore at all?
It sounds like you're describing two chat sessions = two agents, one chat session per agent. The agents get different tools, no shared context, no duct tape. Is this an accurate read?
The duct taping comes in when two different people share an agent, when having a shared context is useful.
The shared context use case is less common. You have to have hit that wall yourself to feel the problem. Does that track?
Yes, since you said that you're two people, then what you begin with is exactly that, right? The session sharing is something you've layered on top, with extra software, not something you basically get from a VPS+UNIX users, right?
The times I've shared contexts in such ways, then you want to share a read-only view, still with the other user not being able to add more messages, I guess you're really talking about group chats here?