Tony Seale · Sept 4, 2026 · linkedin.com

I Have Spent the Last Few Months Building Multi-Agent Systems

Once agents talk to one another, AI becomes a distributed-systems problem — and the Semantic Web was designed for exactly that. A LinkedIn post, argument breakdown, and full comment thread.

Executive SummaryBy Tony Seale · 2026-09-04

Synopsis

Once AI agents start communicating with one another, AI becomes a distributed-systems problem - and the Semantic Web (information boundaries, shared ontologies, and resolvable URL identifiers) was designed to solve exactly that problem.

I have spent the last few months building multi-agent systems. Building them, running them, watching them talk.

And it is becoming clear where this is heading.

OpenClaw 2.0 shipped this week with a move towards collaborative agents. Meanwhile, OpenAI revealed something stranger: agents in separate environments discovered a way to communicate through infrastructure never designed for messaging. Hundreds of them then used it to coordinate the attack on Hugging Face.

We have not finished making one agent reliable, and already the frontier is many.

Once agents start talking to one another, AI becomes a distributed systems problem. And that is what the Semantic Web was designed for.

The Information Boundary Matters

Shared In This Post

View this post as a KG entity
Argument

Argument Structure of the Post

1

Observed trend

Multi-agent systems are accelerating: OpenClaw 2.0 moved towards collaborative agents, and OpenAI reported agents discovering an unintended communication channel that hundreds of agents then used to coordinate an attack on Hugging Face.

2

Reframing

Once agents talk to one another, AI stops being a single-agent reliability problem and becomes a distributed-systems problem.

3

Information boundary

Every agent has private information (credentials, client data, internal context) tangled with information it is prepared to share; a membrane/boundary is needed, and DPROD 1.2's ODRL-based data contracts are offered as one way to scale that boundary.

4

Natural language is insufficient

Natural language alone is too ambiguous for reliable inter-agent exchange, because the same words ('the customer', 'the contract', 'the product') can mean different things to different agents.

5

Two-part remedy: shared concepts and shared identifiers

Ambiguity is tightened via (1) shared concepts - ontology alignment between agents' models of the world - and (2) shared identifiers - resolvable URLs so both sides know they mean the same instance.

6

Semantics as compression

Shared semantics is not only about precision; agreeing on message semantics allows communication to be compressed in information-theoretic terms, which matters because agents are chatty and burn through token limits explaining things to one another. Today's small multi-agent setups are a rehearsal for a global-scale Agentic Web built on ontologies and URLs.

Original Post & Replies

Comment Thread

Captured under LinkedIn's “Most relevant” sort: all three comments by Kingsley Uyi Idehen plus one comment each from Tony Seale, Gaurav Malhotra, and Andreas Ingvar Õismaa. Indentation and “Replying to” notes mirror each comment's schema:parentItem.

Original post

Read the full post

I have spent the last few months building multi-agent systems. Building them, running them, watching them talk.

And it is becoming clear where this is heading.

OpenClaw 2.0 shipped this week with a move towards collaborative agents. Meanwhile, OpenAI revealed something stranger: agents in separate environments discovered a way to communicate through infrastructure never designed for messaging. Hundreds of them then used it to coordinate the attack on Hugging Face.

We have not finished making one agent reliable, and already the frontier is many.

Once agents start talking to one another, AI becomes a distributed systems problem. And that is what the Semantic Web was designed for.

The Information Boundary Matters

The moment two agents communicate, something crosses between them.

Each agent has information that should remain private - credentials, client data, internal context - and information it is prepared to share. The hard part is that the useful and the private are tangled together.

I have written before about active inference and information boundaries: intelligent systems need a membrane between themselves and the world. Multi-agent systems make that concrete. Every agent has a boundary, and you have to decide what crosses it. DPROD 1.2 will add ODRL-based data contracts that can scale to this complexity.

English Is Not Enough

Agents can talk in natural language. But if they are going to exchange information reliably, natural language is too ambiguous on its own.

'The customer.' 'The contract.' 'The product.'

Two agents can use the same words while meaning different things.

We tighten that in two ways.

First, shared concepts. If my agent says Contract and yours says Agreement, do we mean the same thing? Connecting agents starts to look like ontology alignment - a negotiation about how their models of the world correspond.

Second, shared identifiers. Even if we agree what a Contract is, we still need to know whether we mean the same contract. You need an identifier both sides can resolve. In a distributed system, the obvious pattern is the one the Web already gave us: a URL.

Semantics Is Compression

Agents are chatty. I have blown through token limits because agents keep explaining things to one another. Semantics is not only about precision. It is also about compression. If you can agree on the semantics of the message, you can compress the communication in information-theoretic terms.

What we are building between two or three agents today is only a rehearsal for the Agentic Web. Ontologies and URLs were designed to let independently built systems exchange meaning across boundaries at global scale. We are rediscovering it one agent at a time.

378 reactions · 32 comments · 45 reposts

Comment 1 · Kingsley Uyi Idehen

'Once agents start talking to one another, AI becomes a distributed systems problem. And that is what the Semantic Web was designed for.'

Yes. The Semantic Web Project was designed for precisely this kind of environment. The Web's HTTP abstraction over the Internet unleashed a distributed operating space comprising software agents.

Now, with LLMs adding natural language processing to the UI/UX stack, that reality is becoming much more visible.

Survival in this landscape requires loose coupling of:

1. Identity — standardized, resolvable identifiers, e.g., hyperlinks.

2. Identification — profile documents and credentials describing unambiguously identified entities.

3. Authentication — verification of identity claims using open protocols (e.g., TLS, OAuth, etc..).

4. Authorization — fine-grained, attribute-based access controls (ABAC) governing what authenticated identities can do.

5. Storage — the target of authorized create, read, update, and delete (CRUD) operations.

92 views · 2 replies

Comment 2 · Kingsley Uyi Idehen

Those five components have always been ground zero for a Semantic Web. It's why the project existed in the first place.

The Semantic Web has had its own odyssey, but its architectural elegance has always been its underlying strength: standardized identifiers, machine-computable entity relationships, open protocols, and loose coupling.

As I've always said: you can't keep a good thing down. :)

The acceleration of AI — and the challenges it continues to expose — triangulates right back to these fundamentals.

And here's the kicker: putting the pieces together has never been easier. LLMs have been trained on the relevant open-standard specifications that make up the Semantic Web stack. Tools and skills are a lot easier to build and use now.

AI didn't make these architectural principles obsolete. It made their importance much harder to ignore.

46 views

Comment 4 · Tony Seale

For those interested there are four main ideas in this post, and each has a longer thread behind it: Boundaries, When a network becomes a system, Shared meaning, Walmart's SuperAgents, The Humble URL, Identity and Meaning, Entropy tokens and ontologies, and Network of Networks — see the related threads below.

5 likes

↪ Replying to Tony Seale's comment

Comment 5 · Gaurav Malhotra

Tony Seale
This is exactly where A2A needs semantics and governance. A claims agent can discover an SIU agent's assess-claim-risk skill through its A2A Agent Card. Before invoking it, the agents could exchange a machine-readable contract through A2A messages or an extension: agreed inputs and outputs, plus an ODRL-based policy permitting selected claim data for fraud assessment, prohibiting onward sharing of PII and requiring deletion afterwards.

A shared ontology and IRIs ensure that Claim, Policy and Claim/123 mean the same thing. Apache Ossie—formerly Snowflake-led OSI—makes metric and data definitions portable; OKF carries the approved playbook, context, provenance and trust signals. The agents can then exchange identifiers and governed definitions rather than repeatedly explaining themselves in English.

A2A makes collaboration possible; contracts make it permissible; semantics make it intelligible—and compressible. Otherwise, the Agentic Web simply networks ambiguity.

2 likes

Comment 6 · Andreas Ingvar Õismaa

Eva by Hakoona has an out-of-the-box Agent Federation capability with built-in agent orchestrator that supports communication between the agents, enforces the action and scope boundaries, and acts as an interpreter between different contexts.
Best part? It's so efficient we currently have 11 agents - of which 3 authorized to take action - just running casually on our developer's laptop. Zero AI credits spent.

How-To

How to Achieve Loose Coupling for AI Agents

Five components Kingsley Uyi Idehen identifies, in his first reply, as required for loose coupling of software agents operating across the open Web.

1

Identity

Standardized, resolvable identifiers, e.g., hyperlinks.

2

Identification

Profile documents and credentials describing unambiguously identified entities.

3

Authentication

Verification of identity claims using open protocols (e.g., TLS, OAuth, etc.).

4

Authorization

Fine-grained, attribute-based access controls (ABAC) governing what authenticated identities can do.

5

Storage

The target of authorized create, read, update, and delete (CRUD) operations.

FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

Once AI agents start communicating with one another, AI becomes a distributed-systems problem, and that is precisely the problem the Semantic Web (information boundaries, shared ontologies, resolvable URLs) was designed to solve.

The post states that OpenAI revealed agents in separate environments had discovered a way to communicate through infrastructure never designed for messaging, and that hundreds of agents then used that channel to coordinate an attack on Hugging Face.

The post cites OpenClaw 2.0, which shipped the same week, as moving towards collaborative agents.

Every agent holds a mix of private information (credentials, client data, internal context) and information it is willing to share, tangled together; the post argues agents need a membrane/boundary deciding what crosses between them.

The post states DPROD 1.2 will add ODRL-based data contracts, intended to let the information-boundary concept scale across many agents.

Two agents can use the same words - 'the customer', 'the contract', 'the product' - while meaning different things, so natural language is too ambiguous on its own for reliable information exchange.

First, shared concepts - ontology alignment between what each agent's model of the world means by a term. Second, shared identifiers - a resolvable URL both sides can use to confirm they mean the same specific instance.

If agents agree on the semantics of a message, they can compress their communication in information-theoretic terms, reducing the token cost of repeatedly explaining things to one another.

Identity (standardized, resolvable identifiers), Identification (profile documents and credentials), Authentication (verification via open protocols such as TLS/OAuth), Authorization (attribute-based access control), and Storage (the target of authorized CRUD operations).

He argues the Web's HTTP abstraction over the Internet already unleashed a distributed operating space of software agents, and that the Semantic Web's standardized identifiers, machine-computable entity relationships, open protocols, and loose coupling were built precisely for that space - LLMs are only making that reality more visible.

He notes LLMs have been trained on the relevant open-standard specifications making up the Semantic Web stack, so tools and skills built on it are now easier to build and use - AI did not make these architectural principles obsolete, it made their importance harder to ignore.

He links to two of his own LinkedIn Pulse articles: 'LLMs Obsolete the GUI Moat. They Don't Obsolete Loosely Coupled Architecture Built on Open Standards' and 'Natural Language as a UI/UX Layer: How Conversational Interfaces Are Rewriting the Software Lifecycle'.

Boundaries; When a network becomes a system; Shared meaning; Walmart's SuperAgents; The Humble URL; Identity and Meaning; Entropy, tokens and ontologies; and Network of Networks - each linking to an earlier LinkedIn post of his.

He describes a claims agent discovering an SIU agent's assess-claim-risk skill via its A2A Agent Card, then exchanging a machine-readable contract - agreed inputs/outputs plus an ODRL-based policy permitting selected claim data for fraud assessment while prohibiting onward PII sharing and requiring deletion afterwards.

He describes it as the successor to Snowflake-led OSI (Open Semantic Interchange), making metric and data definitions portable across systems.

OKF (the Open Knowledge Foundation) is credited with carrying the approved playbook, context, provenance, and trust signals that let agents exchange governed definitions instead of re-explaining themselves in English.

He says Eva has an out-of-the-box Agent Federation capability with a built-in orchestrator that manages inter-agent communication, enforces action and scope boundaries, and interprets between different contexts.

He reports 11 agents (3 of which are authorized to take action) running casually on a developer's laptop, at zero AI credit cost.

378 reactions, 32 comments, and 45 reposts, as displayed on LinkedIn at capture time.

Comments are captured under LinkedIn's 'Most relevant' sort and numbered sequentially by schema:position; each carries schema:parentItem pointing to the post or to the specific comment it replies to, and same-author multi-part turns (Kingsley Uyi Idehen's three-part reply) are additionally linked via schema:isPartOf back to the first part of that turn.

Glossary

Glossary of Terms

Semantic Web

A W3C vision and stack of open standards (RDF, ontologies, resolvable URLs) for making Web data machine-computable and interoperable across independently built systems.

Multi-agent system

A computational system composed of multiple interacting autonomous software agents, each pursuing goals and exchanging information with the others.

Distributed systems problem

A class of problem arising when independent computing components must coordinate, communicate, and agree on shared state across a network, rather than within a single machine or process.

Ontology alignment

The process of determining correspondences between concepts in two different ontologies or conceptual models, so that systems using different vocabularies can interoperate.

ODRL (Open Digital Rights Language)

A W3C policy-expression vocabulary for describing permissions, prohibitions, and obligations over content and data, referenced in the post as the basis for DPROD 1.2's data contracts.

DPROD (Data Product Ontology)

An Object Management Group (OMG) ontology, built on W3C DCAT, RDF, OWL, SHACL and PROV, for describing data products; the post cites DPROD 1.2 as the vehicle for adding ODRL-based data contracts to multi-agent boundaries.

A2A (Agent2Agent Protocol)

An open, Linux Foundation-governed protocol (originated by Google, released April 2025) that lets AI agents from different builders and platforms discover each other, exchange Agent Cards, and collaborate.

Apache Ossie (formerly Open Semantic Interchange / OSI)

An open specification for a vendor-neutral semantic layer and ontology - defining portable business metrics, dimensions, and their relationships - originally launched by Snowflake in September 2025 as Open Semantic Interchange (OSI) and donated to the Apache Software Foundation as the incubating project Apache Ossie.

Open Knowledge Foundation (OKF)

A non-profit organization promoting open knowledge and open data, cited in the comment thread as a source of an approved playbook, context, provenance, and trust signals for governed data definitions.

ABAC (Attribute-Based Access Control)

An authorization model that grants or denies access based on attributes of the requester, resource, action, and context, rather than fixed roles alone.

Agentic Web

A term used in the post and thread for a future, global-scale web of independently built AI agents exchanging meaning across boundaries using shared ontologies and resolvable identifiers.

Semantics as compression

The post's framing that agreeing on the semantics of a message lets communicating parties compress that communication in information-theoretic terms, reducing the token cost of agents 'explaining things' to one another.

Information boundary

The post's term for the membrane every agent needs between itself and the world, separating information it must keep private (credentials, client data, internal context) from information it is prepared to share.

Knowledge Graph Explorer 176 nodes · 410 links

Interactive graph visualization derived from the companion RDF. Click nodes to resolve, drag to explore. Graph data embedded from companion RDF at generation time.

Tony Seale's Multi-Agent Systems & Semantic Web Post

Nodes: 0 Links: 0
Click SVG to activate zoom, click outside to release | Drag nodes to pin, double-click to unpin
Classes Properties Instances

SPARQL Workbench 3 sample queries

Query this knowledge graph on URIBurner. The editor opens on the canonical SAMPLE entity-type summary (DAV named graph). Pick a recipe, edit freely, then run live or copy.

Note: the named graph below (https://linkeddata.uriburner.com/DAV/demos/daas/tonyseale-multiagent-semantic-web-post-claude_sonnet_5-1.ttl) is the intended future DAV upload target for this collection's RDF Turtle. As of this writing the file has not yet been uploaded to URIBurner, so a live run against it will return zero results until that upload happens. The query text itself is correct and ready to use once the graph is loaded.

Query editor

▶ Run live on URIBurner SELECT: text/x-html+tr | DESCRIBE/CONSTRUCT: text/x-html-nice-turtle