Skip to content

Why agents like datadata

datadata is being honed against applications where AI agents and humans edit the same data. Several properties that are merely nice for humans turn out to be essential for agents.

The whole surface is a handful of referential verbs — subscribe, read, create, update, delete — over one kind of thing: the document. An agent’s tool definitions stay small, and there are no special cases to teach: the same calls work for user documents, schemas, and system state.

Agents can create their own document types

Section titled “Agents can create their own document types”

Because schemas are documents at sys:schema:<type>, an agent that needs a new shape of data can write the schema and start using it in the same session — designing a data model is just more document editing. The schema it writes is validated against the meta-schema, so a malformed design is rejected like any other bad write.

Structured edits are RFC 6902 patches — compact, diff-shaped, and readable by the agent itself, by a reviewing human, and by the model judging a conflict. When a change commits, the event log records which principal wrote it — human or agent — so “which edits did the AI make?” is answerable from the data.

The staged session gives agents what they actually need: a place to accumulate multi-document work, a three-way conflict preview they can read as data, and an atomic, refusable commit — detailed in Sessions as agent workflow.

With in-process clients, an agent runs server-side as a first-class client — same API, no WebSocket. Its edits stream to the browser as it works, and the user can keep editing the same documents by hand at the same time. Both sides converge on the same live state.