Show HN: Real-time dashboard for Claude Code agent teams (opens in new tab)

The hooks performance finding matches what I've seen. I run multiple Claude Code agents in parallel on a remote VM and the first thing I learned was that anything blocking in the agent's critical path kills throughput. Even a few hundred milliseconds per hook call compounds fast when you have agents making dozens of tool calls per minute.

The docker-based service pattern is smart too. I went a different direction for my own setup -- tmux sessions with worktree isolation per agent, which keeps things lightweight but means I have zero observability into what each agent is actually doing beyond tailing logs manually. This solves that gap in a way that doesn't add overhead to the agent itself, which is the right tradeoff.

Curious about one thing -- how does the dashboard handle the case where a sub-agent spawns its own sub-agents? Does it track the full tree or just one level deep?

Are you guys spending hundreds (or thousands) of dollars a day on Claude tokens? Holy crap. I can't get more than one or two agents to do anything useful for very long before I'm hitting my usage limits.

I tried using hooks for setting up my DIYed version of what channels is now in Claude. I had Claude writing them and not really looking at the results cause the vibes are strong. It struggled with odd behaviors around them. Nice to see some of the possible reasons, I ended up killing that branch of work so I never figured out exactly what was happening.

Now I'm regretting not going deeper on these. This is the type of interface that I think will be perfect for some things I want to demonstrate to a greater audience.

Now that we have the actual internals I have so many things I want to dig through.

This is exactly what I needed. Running 4 autonomous marketing agents (content, engagement, learning, strategy) and the hardest part is visibility into what they're doing. Currently built a custom daily activity summary but it's basic. How do you handle the case where agents are running fine but producing bad outputs? We had an issue where the quality scorer's centroids went stale and the agent kept posting content that scored "ok" internally but got zero real engagement.

This is what I've been missing running multi-agent ops through OpenClaw.

The opacity problem is the one I hit hard: when a coordinator spawns 3-4 agents in parallel (builder, reviewer, tester, each with their own tool calls), the only visibility you have is what they choose to report back. Which is often sanitised and … dangerously optimistic.

The role separation / independent verification structure I run helps catch bad outputs, but it doesn't give me the live timeline of HOW an agent got to a conclusion. That's why I find this genuinely useful.

Noticed OpenClaw is already on the roadmap - had my hands tingling to fork and adapt it. Starring it for now and added to my watchlist. The hook architecture should translate … OpenClaw fires session events that could feed the same pipeline. Looking forward to seeing that happen.

This looks to solve something I've been struggling with in my project, Sugar (1). Using the SDK and having sub agents running I found it difficult to have real- time insight into exactly what they were doing.

You can create a huge task list and Ralph mode can crank through it and also store persistent memory.

Interested in trying them together. 1. https://github.com/roboticforce/sugar

> Claude code hooks are blocking - performance degrades rapidly if you have a lot of plugins that use hooks

can confirm. ended up being really careful about what runs synchronously vs in the background.

IMHO the "sanitised optimism" thing others mention here is real too. had to add explicit verification steps because Claude kept reporting success when it just silenced the error. now I always make it prove things actually worked before moving on.

The "sanitised optimism" problem is real. I've seen agents report "fixed!" when they just suppressed the error.

Role separation (builder/reviewer/tester) helps but the reviewer agent also tends to be too polite. Making the reviewer explicitly output PASS/FAIL/UNKNOWN with no room for "looks good overall" is the only thing that worked for me.

So many comment sections on these vibe coded Show HNs are just full of obvious bots talking to each other in the most generic boring way.

The sanitised optimism problem mentioned upthread is the real gap here. Event stream logging tells you what tools were called and in what order, but it doesn't tell you whether the agent's self-reported outcome matches reality.

I think there's a huge amount of value in just having a clear visual timeline of what all these sub-agents are actually doing behind the scenes

Good to know background hooks make that much of a difference. How are you handling the case where multiple agent teams are writing to the same jsonl files simultaneously?

great idea. I am curious what the future of coding with multiple terminals and agents will look like and this looks like a great start!

Cool project. The React reconciler underneath Claude Code's terminal layer is a solid foundation for this kind of real-time rendering.

Looks cool