Project Info

VOW- transforming multi-agent transactions

Devpost

💡

Inspiration

Before money, humans exchanged value through barter—trading goods, services, and trust. We wondered: What does bartering look like in an agentic world? In a future full of autonomous AI agents, value shouldn't just mean dollars. It could mean data, promises, insight, or cooperation. VOW was born to explore that idea. ⚙️ What It Does VOW (Verified Operations Wrapper) is an incentive-based broker system—a kind of “space police” for AI agents. It mediates the flow of interactions between client agents (users or other AIs) and service agents (like a fitness recommender or assistant). But instead of just routing requests, it evaluates offers, checks trustworthiness, and enforces value-for-value exchanges. Think of it as a marketplace for agent interactions, where what you give (data, behavior, insight) unlocks what you get. 🛠 How We Built It We used Letta to create a multi-agent architecture with: Client Agents – who request services and offer some kind value in return Service Agents – who provide services (e.g., answers, workouts) and accept some value Broker Agents – who govern the exchange, decide if terms are fair, and track fulfillment Letta's stateful memory made it easier to simulate long-running agent interactions and implement enforcement logic like “did the user actually follow through?” 🧱 Challenges We Ran Into Letta was powerful but tricky. We hit some wild bugs—at one point, our agents entered a strange loop, the "Doom Protocol", where they achieved singularity and just started going off infinitely at each other. Debugging multi-agent conversations with state memory was surprisingly complex, but also really fun. 🏆 Accomplishments That We’re Proud Of We built a working prototype of a non-cash, agentic value exchange We implemented trust logic and enforcement in a dynamic broker layer We turned a high-level philosophy into a concrete, interactive demo 📚 What We Learned Value can take many forms, and AI agents need a system to reason about it Enforcing incentives between agents is just as important as defining them Tooling for multi-agent orchestration is still early—but it’s full of possibility 🚀 What’s Next for VOW Build a more robust reputation system for agents and users Expand the types of value that can be negotiated (e.g. compute time, community karma, promises) Experiment with real-world agent marketplaces where AI services can negotiate for data, not dollars Release a framework for others to build “value-aware” agent stacks

Analysis

Compare with all teams

View

Metric

Figures cover GitHub contributors during the hackathon window. A co-authored commit counts in full for each author, so per-member totals add up to more than the whole-team figures.

Technology

Found in codeClaimed only
  • CSSIn code
  • Next.jsIn code
  • ReactIn code
  • Tailwind CSSIn code
  • TypeScriptIn code
  • AnthropicClaimed

5 of 6 appear in the indexed code. 1 claimed on Devpost could not be matched to code, which may simply mean the tool leaves no trace in the repository.

AI coding agents

  • Claude CodeConfig · Commits

Detected from committed agent config files and commit authorship. Absence of a signal is not proof an agent was unused.

Codebase size

Source size

278 KB

Source files

28

Counts recognized source files only; vendored directories, binaries and lockfiles are excluded, so this is smaller than the repository on disk.

0 stars