Fetching from the wire…
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
Public story · 2026-07-16 · high
It tracks which subagent actually read each artifact and pushes revisions or revocations to every token holder, something a shared file path can't do.
Why now: Waggle went from a July 8 post to 762 stars and a v0.5.3 release by July 14.
Waggle turns pasted context into a 30-byte token that resolves in 39 nanoseconds, per the project's GitHub repo. Multi-agent setups re-paste the same artifact into every subagent's context, whether the reader needs it all or not. Waggle's token stays about 30 bytes no matter how large the artifact underneath is.
Each artifact resolves into a consumer-specific projection sized to the reading model. Only the requested slice travels, under a byte budget; nothing auto-expands into context outright.
The tool, published as modiqo/waggle, also tracks which subagent actually opened its input. It pushes revisions, or revocations, to every token holder when the source changes, something a raw filesystem path can't do.
It runs as an MCP server, a one-line config addition in Claude Code, Codex, or Cursor. The repo lists 39ns for a cache-hit resolve, 39µs for a durable append, and 1.2ms p50 at the edge. It's dual-licensed under Apache-2.0 and MIT, shipped v0.5.3 on July 14, and picked up 762 stars since posting on July 8.
Every agent framework still passing raw file paths between subagents is already behind this, if the revision propagation holds up outside a demo. The repo doesn't say what happens to the byte budget when several subagents request different slices of the same artifact at once. It also doesn't say how a token holder catches up after being offline through a revision.
Each link below shares sources, entities, or timing with this story.
Claude Code competes with Cursor / Shared entities / Same source domain / Shared topic / What happened next
Linked by a graph relationship (Claude Code competes with Cursor); both cover Apache, Claude Code, Codex, Cursor; reported by the same outlet (github.com).
Codex competes with Claude Code / Shared entities / Same source domain / What happened next
Linked by a graph relationship (Codex competes with Claude Code); both cover Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, July; reported by the same outlet (github.com).
Codex competes with Claude Code / Shared entities / Same source domain / Shared topic / What happened next
Linked by a graph relationship (Codex competes with Claude Code); both cover Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, July; reported by the same outlet (github.com).
Linked by a graph relationship (Codex competes with Claude Code); both cover Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, MCP; reported by the same outlet (github.com).
Linked by a graph relationship (Codex competes with Claude Code); both cover Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, MIT; reported by the same outlet (github.com).
OpenCode competes with Claude Code / Shared entities / Same source domain / Shared topic / What happened next
Linked by a graph relationship (OpenCode competes with Claude Code); both cover Claude Code, Codex, July, MCP; reported by the same outlet (github.com).
Microsoft criticizes Claude Code / Shared entities / Same source domain / Shared topic / What happened next
Linked by a graph relationship (Microsoft criticizes Claude Code); both cover Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, July; reported by the same outlet (github.com).
OpenCode competes with Claude Code / Shared entities / Same source domain / Shared topic / What happened next
Linked by a graph relationship (OpenCode competes with Claude Code); both cover Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, July; reported by the same outlet (github.com).