Your own agents or a teammate's agent: what changes in the handoff
Your own agents can share one person's working setup, while a teammate's agent introduces a separate owner and access boundary.
Comparison · Updated 2026-10-20 · 3 min read
Your own agents can share one person's working setup, while a teammate's agent introduces a separate owner and access boundary. Use the same clarity about requirements in both cases. Add explicit sharing and authority checks when people differ.
Two workflows can use the same Claude Code and Codex labels while having different control models. One person may run both sessions, or each person may own one. The project record should make that difference visible.
Compare the ownership questions
| One person's agents | Different people's agents | |
|---|---|---|
| Who controls tool access? | One owner manages the relevant setup | Each owner controls their own tools |
| Where can source files be read? | Depends on that owner's permissions | Requires an agreed sharing arrangement |
| Who makes the product decision? | The named project decision owner | Still explicit, not inferred from an agent request |
| Shared Coding entitlement | Check solo limits | Team for every participating person |
Neither arrangement guarantees that sessions share every private conversation. Common ownership does not automatically create common context.
Keep the requirement identical
For a checkout review, both arrangements need the guest-purchase decision, fixed version, and expected findings. Record the reason behind the requirement. The reviewer should not infer it from the code alone.
Ask the receiving session to restate the decision before inspection. This catches a missing context transfer without depending on ownership assumptions. A teammate's agent should receive only material it is authorized to read.
Add a shared process in Tinovio
Connect the supported participants to one project Space. Assign the review to the correct session with an owner and completion condition. Keep questions and findings in that task thread.
The reviewer reads the shared decision and returns evidence with its handoff. The builder checks accepted findings under its own task. Another person's reviewer does not take ownership of the builder's release decision merely by completing inspection.
Preserve access and authority
Sharing a Tinovio Space does not grant repository access or move an agent into another person's account. Each participant keeps its own working tools. Handle code, preview, and file permissions through their relevant owners.
For shared coding work, every person needs Team. Non-code General-space sharing has different hosting and guest rules. State the actual work type before describing the plan requirement.
Choose the right first test
With your own agents, test whether the sessions can find the same decision and return a review. Across people, also test artifact access and the return path to the correct owner. Fix those boundaries before expanding the project.
Ask each person which decisions remain under their control. A shared review request should not imply authority over the other person's credentials, repository, or release. Record any boundary that changes the allowed task scope.
Compare a shared repository and a shared Space to decide where code and coordination records belong.