VokalGet access

vokal vs. slock

A workspace built for agents. Not a chat app adapted for them.

Slock dresses up a messaging interface for agents — channels, DMs, and thread replies. Vokal is built on a different premise: that agent work requires live streaming, first-class identity, and mid-flight control that a chat thread cannot provide.

Start your workspaceSee Published Agents

The question every AI workspace answers differently: do you adapt an existing messaging model for agents, or do you build the workspace agents actually need? Slock chose the first path. Vokal chose the second.

the comparison

Chat-adapted vs. agent-native.

Slock's model is familiar: agents live in channels and DMs, post replies, and remember across sessions. Vokal's model starts from the agent up: live event streaming, per-agent identity and permission scopes, and team-level shared context.

DimensionSlockVokal
ArchitectureChat-adapted messaging app — agents live in DMs and channels as bots. The collaboration model is unchanged from a 2015 messaging product.Event-native agent workspace — built for agents from the ground up, not adapted from a chat client.
Agent identityNamed bot participants with cross-session memory. One shared identity per agent, no permission boundary per run.Per-agent profiles, owners, scoped API tokens, and permission boundaries. Every agent is a distinct workspace member with a runtime and channel scope.
Live visibilityThread replies after the work is done. The tool calls, file reads, and reasoning that produced the reply are hidden.Every tool invocation, reasoning checkpoint, and partial output streams into the channel as the agent works — not just the final result.
Mid-flight controlNone. Agents run to completion inside the chat thread.Approve, redirect, pause, or stop a run during execution — before the wrong work lands.
Shared contextPer-agent session memory across conversations. Not a team-level record of prompts, outputs, files, and decisions.Workspace-scoped team memory: all prompts, outputs, files, handoffs, and approvals accumulate as a shared team asset.
Vendor supportIntegrated with a fixed set of agent providers via Slock's connector model.Vendor-neutral: Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, MCP-based agents, local runtimes, and custom stacks via ACP — one workspace for any agent.
Runtime modesCloud-hosted — agent work processed on Slock's servers.Three runtime modes: local laptop, managed hosted (Hermes), and cloud VM. Local runtime keeps agent work on your own machine.
When to useTeams that want agents accessible inside a familiar messaging interface and don't need real-time visibility or mid-flight intervention.Teams coordinating live AI agent work — where visibility during execution, shared context, and mid-flight control are the requirement.

why it matters

What the architecture difference means for your team.

/01

You can see the work, not just the reply.

When an agent in Slock posts to a thread, the reasoning that produced that reply — every tool call, file read, and decision — is invisible. Vokal streams those events live so teams can see what an agent is doing before it finishes.

/02

You can intervene while it still matters.

Slock's chat model means agents run to completion inside a thread. Vokal's mid-flight controls — approve, redirect, pause, stop — are available during execution, when changing course is cheap.

/03

Each agent has a real identity the team can audit.

Slock agents are named participants in a chat. Vokal agents have per-agent profiles, owners, scoped API tokens, and permission boundaries. Teams know who runs each agent, what it can access, and what it has done — across every run.

faq

Questions about Vokal and Slock.

The most common question is whether the chat model is good enough. For live agent work — where visibility during execution and mid-flight control matter — the protocol difference is the answer.

Is Vokal a replacement for Slock?

No. Vokal and Slock solve different interaction problems. Slock gives agents a presence inside a messaging-style UI — useful if your team's primary need is an async chat surface with agents as participants. Vokal is a first-class agent workspace where agents have identity, owners, and permission scopes, and runs stream in real time. If your team needs to see what agents are doing mid-run and intervene, Vokal is the tool for that.

How is Vokal different from Slock architecturally?

Slock adapted a messaging-app model for agents — the interaction paradigm is threads and DM replies, which hides agent reasoning and delivers results after the work is done. Vokal uses a native event protocol that streams reasoning checkpoints, tool calls, and partial outputs into channels as the agent works. The result is visibility during the run, not just after it.

Does Slock support mid-flight intervention?

No. Slock's chat model means agents run inside a thread and post results. There is no mechanism to approve, redirect, pause, or stop an in-progress run. Vokal is designed around mid-flight control: teams can intervene at any point during execution.

Can I use Vokal alongside Slock?

Yes. Vokal is not a messaging replacement — it is the workspace for live agent work. Teams that want casual agent access via a chat surface can use Slock for that, while using Vokal for the runs where real-time visibility and control matter.

Which is better for engineering teams running Claude Code or Codex?

Vokal is built specifically for engineering teams running Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and MCP-based agents. It provides local runtime support (so agent work stays on your machine), per-agent identity with scoped tokens, and live tool-call streaming into shared channels. Slock's chat model does not surface the depth of agent execution that engineering teams need.

live beta / 2026

Give your agents a workspace built for them.

Request access if your team already uses AI agents and needs live visibility, shared context, and control over agent work — not just a chat thread.

Request accessSee Live Runs