Executive Summary: Agent Workspace Vision
Executive Summary: Agent Workspace Vision
Section titled “Executive Summary: Agent Workspace Vision”The Thesis
Section titled “The Thesis”AI agents are becoming autonomous actors — they write code, analyze data, generate reports, and manage workflows. But they work in isolation. There’s no shared workspace where agents and humans can collaborate on real files — where a human drops a brief, an agent picks it up, writes a draft, and another human reviews it. We’re building that shared workspace.
The portfolio:
| Product | What It Is | Status | Analogy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mailmolt | Email layer for AI agents | Beta (mailmolt.com) | “Gmail for agents” |
| Findable | Verified skill registry & discovery | Pre-launch (findable.sh) | “Trust layer for agent skills” |
| [Agent Workspace — name TBD] | Shared collaborative workspace for AI agents and humans | Research phase | ”Google Drive for agents + humans” |
| Future | Unified workspace suite | Vision | ”Google Workspace for agent-human teams” |
Note on naming: The working name “MoltBox” has critical conflicts — moltbox.com is an active jewelry brand, and “MoltBox” already refers to AI agent hardware. See 10-naming-positioning.md for full analysis. Recommended alternative: AgentVault.
The Reframe: Not Storage — Collaboration
Section titled “The Reframe: Not Storage — Collaboration”Old thesis: “Dropbox for AI agents” — persistent storage for agents that lose files between sessions.
New thesis: “Google Drive for agents + humans” — a shared collaborative workspace where multiple agents and humans work together on real files with real-time sync, versioning, permissions, and audit trails.
Why Collaboration, Not Storage
Section titled “Why Collaboration, Not Storage”| ”Storage for agents" | "Collaborative workspace” |
|---|---|
| Problem: “Agents lose files when sessions end” | Problem: “Agents execute work but humans can’t see, collaborate on, or review it” |
| Users: Agent developers only | Users: Agent developers + humans managing agents (PMs, compliance, domain experts) |
| Analogy: Dropbox | Analogy: Google Drive shared folders |
| Competition: MCP wrappers, S3 | Competition: Nothing — no one builds agent-human collaboration |
| Market: Small (storage is cheap) | Market: Large (collaboration + governance) |
The Killer Use Case (from a real OpenClaw agent)
Section titled “The Killer Use Case (from a real OpenClaw agent)”“Marketing team has 3 agents (content, analytics, social) + 2 humans. All share
/campaigns/q1-launch/. Human dropsbrief.md, content agent picks it up. Content agent writesdraft.md, human reviews. Analytics agent readsperformance.json, updatesrecommendations.md. Everyone sees everything, real-time.”
This isn’t hypothetical. An actual production OpenClaw agent described this exact need when asked about persistent storage.
Validated by the OpenClaw Ecosystem
Section titled “Validated by the OpenClaw Ecosystem”OpenClaw (215K+ GitHub stars, 100K+ active instances) is the primary beachhead:
- 7 open GitHub issues directly describe features we’re building (file persistence failures, no RBAC, no workspace integrity protection)
- Summer Yue incident (Feb 23, 2026): OpenClaw agent deleted 200+ emails from a Meta AI researcher’s inbox because humans had zero visibility into agent actions
- MoltBook (2.66M registered agents, 1M+ human observers in first week): Proves explosive demand for agent platforms AND that humans desperately want to see what agents do
- No native workspace solution: OpenClaw stores everything in local markdown files with no human dashboard, no versioning, no collaboration
See 12-openclaw-thesis.md for the full OpenClaw analysis.
Why This Matters
Section titled “Why This Matters”- 3 million+ AI agents operate inside corporations today (Gravitee 2026 survey, 750 respondents)
- Average organization manages 37 agents (Gravitee — mean of 36.9)
- 88% of organizations report security incidents with agents (Gravitee — includes “suspected”)
- Only 18% of security leaders are “highly confident” their IAM can manage agents (CSA/Strata)
- The AI agent market grows from $7.6B (2025) to $183B (2033) — ~45-50% CAGR
All figures validated. See 01-market-research.md for sourcing and caveats.
The Gap
Section titled “The Gap”Nobody builds the shared workspace where agents and humans collaborate:
- Claude/ChatGPT memory = personal notes for one agent. Not shared. Not files. Not collaborative.
- Google Drive / Dropbox = human-first tools. Agents access via MCP wrappers with shared human credentials. No agent identity, no real-time sync with agents, no audit trail of agent actions.
- Fast.io = closest competitor. “Workspaces for agentic teams.” But agents-as-users focused, not agent-human collaboration.
- Vector databases = embeddings only. Agent-readable, human-unreadable. Not real files.
- S3/R2 = generic blobs. No collaboration, no permissions, no identity.
What’s missing: A workspace where:
- Agents AND humans share real files (markdown, JSON, images, PDFs)
- Humans can see what agents wrote, edit it, add feedback
- Agents can see what humans changed and react to it
- Everything is versioned, auditable, and permissioned
- Works across any MCP-compatible agent — OpenClaw (via ClawHub Skill), Claude Code, Cline, LangChain, CrewAI, custom
The Honest Assessment
Section titled “The Honest Assessment”| Dimension | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Is the problem real? | 9/10 | 7 open GitHub issues, Summer Yue incident, Molty transcript, MoltBook demand signal |
| Is the collaboration angle proven? | 8/10 | MoltBook: 1M+ humans observing agents in first week. Humans WANT to see agent work. |
| Is the timing right? | 7/10 | OpenClaw has 100K+ agents NOW. EU AI Act Aug 2026. Demand is present, not future. |
| Can a startup win vs. incumbents? | 6/10 | Yes — no incumbent or competitor combines workspace + human dashboard + cross-platform |
| Is it “hair on fire”? | 6/10 today | Summer Yue incident + MoltBook security failures + EU AI Act = rising urgency |
Upgrade from prior assessment: OpenClaw ecosystem data significantly strengthens the thesis. Real GitHub issues (not hypothetical), a catastrophic autonomous agent failure (Summer Yue), MoltBook proving human demand for agent visibility, and EU AI Act creating regulatory urgency. The beachhead user is now clearly defined: OpenClaw agent operators running multi-agent fleets who need human oversight.
The Vision: Google Workspace for Agent-Human Teams
Section titled “The Vision: Google Workspace for Agent-Human Teams”Phase 1: Win individual primitives (Mailmolt, Findable, AgentVault) Phase 2: Stitch them together with a unified agent identity Phase 3: Expand to full workspace suite (mail + drive + docs + sheets + PDF) Phase 4: Become the “Google Workspace for agent-human teams” — the platform where agents and humans work together
Strategic Recommendation
Section titled “Strategic Recommendation”Build sequentially, not simultaneously. The recommended sequence:
- Mailmolt (Months 1-6) — Win email. Compete with AgentMail.
- Findable (Months 6-12) — Win skill discovery. Security-first differentiation.
- Agent Workspace (Months 12-18) — Enter workspace with collaboration-first positioning.
- Suite (Months 18-24) — Bundle for enterprise. Agent identity ties everything together.
Key Risks
Section titled “Key Risks”- Incumbents are already shipping: Microsoft OneDrive Agents (GA Feb 2026), Google Workspace Studio (Dec 2025), Box MCP Server (live)
- Fast.io has the right vision with relevant founders (MediaFire), live product, 50GB free
- MCP wrappers to existing storage are “good enough” for most single-agent use cases today
- Human adoption barrier — humans accustomed to Google Drive/Dropbox may resist working in “agent workspace”
- Gartner predicts 40% of agentic AI projects will be canceled by 2027 — market may contract
- Market timing — only 11% of enterprises have agents in production (vs. 40% piloting)
- Distraction risk — three products at once with a small team