Source
The a16z Show — Can AI Fix Professional Networking? | Inside Cosign (October 31, 2026) ·
at 20:10 ▸
When this applies
when an automated assistant has rich knowledge of a principal's goals but no direct channel to act on another principal's behalf without human-mediated back-and-forth
The takeaway
The next leap in automation comes not from making one agent smarter, but from letting two agents representing different principals talk to each other directly.
Why it works
Giving agents a direct communication protocol with each other (rather than drafting emails for humans to relay) removes a layer of friction and lets matching/negotiation happen at machine speed and precision.
One level up
Removing the human-in-the-middle step between two already-automated processes is often the real unlock, not further improving either process alone.
Where it stops holding
This stops working when the negotiation requires trust, nuance, or accountability that agents can't yet reliably represent on behalf of their principals, risking bad deals made autonomously.
Detail
situation: Personal agents (e.g., Muse, which hit 10M users) could know users well but could only draft messages for humans to send, creating friction in connecting people.
decision: Techagon introduced an agent-to-agent protocol so a company's agent and a customer's personal agent could negotiate directly.
outcome: Early agent-to-agent communication appeared in customer success use cases, inspiring Cosign to pursue agent-to-agent matching for hiring and networking (my agent talks to the company's agent, or two people's agents assess 'coincidence of intent' before connecting).
lesson: Direct agent-to-agent channels can replace the inefficient email-relay model of digital negotiation/matching.
In their words
Techagon was one of the first to introduce their agent-to-agent protocol with Muse and Instinct. And their customers, who might be big companies, like a car rental company, say, and the personal user can just negotiate directly with the agent on the other side.