[ceroxylon]

Hopefully there is some sort of version history implemented or planned like they have in Cowork[0]... this sounds great until a co-worker hijacks your Claude session with a worse idea and derails it from what you were intending.

[0] "Editing this message will create a new conversation branch. You can switch between branches using the arrow navigation buttons."

[mhegazy2]

this is discussed in https://claude.com/blog/agent-identity-access-model

[tekacs]

I don't think that that's quite what the parent commenter had in mind.

From reading that and materials on it, it seems unclear if – let's say you do what's done in the demos on the site and 'dispatch work' from a thread in a shared channel (e.g. from some discussion) – that if any one of your coworkers replies below you and says, "Actually, could you fold in <blah> as well?" that Claude wouldn't listen to them and thus derail the work.

[stevenpetryk]

Yeah, there is a level of organizational trust that is required to use this tool (as with any system that allows distributing access via service accounts).

We do signal to Claude that there's a difference between a conversation's initiator versus incoming participants and we've found that in situations where people disagree on an approach, Claude patiently waits for a resolution while correcting any misunderstandings.

It's also worth mentioning that since Claude has its own identity, a coworker cannot enter a thread and commandeer _your_ identity; you collectively steer how Claude acts with its _own_ identity (it opens PRs as itself, browses Datadog as itself, etc).

[theshrike79]

If a coworker "hijacks" your session, you go "Yo, dude, fuck off" or walk over to their desk and slap them on the back of the head.

Anyway, if that happens, you've got organisational issues. Claude can't fix that.