Superseded by #3389. This is now question 4 there.
What this asked
Whether Buzz should pass opaque references — organization, selected agent, optional project scope, and Buzz channel — to a remote runtime over the existing A2A extension mechanism, so that runtime knows which context produced a turn.
Why it moved
It is a sub-question of the runtime boundary in #3389, not a separate proposal. Keeping it in its own thread made it look like a named format was being proposed. It is not, and no new format, profile, or registry is being suggested.
The limitation, restated
These would be forwarded metadata only. They would not authorize anything on the source runtime by themselves. Whether a scope should ever affect execution, and what proof would be required first, is an open question rather than a claim.
What this asked
Whether Buzz should pass opaque references — organization, selected agent, optional project scope, and Buzz channel — to a remote runtime over the existing A2A extension mechanism, so that runtime knows which context produced a turn.
Why it moved
It is a sub-question of the runtime boundary in #3389, not a separate proposal. Keeping it in its own thread made it look like a named format was being proposed. It is not, and no new format, profile, or registry is being suggested.
The limitation, restated
These would be forwarded metadata only. They would not authorize anything on the source runtime by themselves. Whether a scope should ever affect execution, and what proof would be required first, is an open question rather than a claim.