u/PA100T0

As the title says: Can we get a bigger sub like twice as much as the Max plan for twice as much? 200$ plan like Anthropic but just 2x Ollama’s Max plan.

Please?

I'm building RoboCo, a virtual company of 25 AI agents + 1 human CEO (me). It's not a loop, nor a harness, nor a workflow, not even a framework. It's a state machine. Backend, frontend, UX/UI cells, PMs, QA, a PR-review gate, the whole org chart. Each agent gets its own git workspace, they coordinate through a gateway of intent verbs. Open source, self-hosted, AGPL...

I'm not just running the whole team, I'm also developing the platform that runs it, at the same time. So a lot of my sessions are the agents catastrophically failing and looping on some bug I introduced in the orchestrator. Because at this point: I'm the bottleneck. I'm the main blocker. I'm the one introducing bugs.

RoboCo runs on glm-5.2:cloud for the agent reasoning and qwen3-embedding for the in-house RAG, both through Ollama. And honestly… the quality is quite close to Claude for these agentic workloads. Not benchmarked, no profiling, just my feeling on the dashboards while debugging (I'm not claiming Ollama beats Claude on benchmarks). What I'm saying is: under a real, messy, token-hostile agentic workload it held up where a $200+ sub didn't, and the quality didn't fall.

Now, the actual: A PM that couldn't send a task back to rework (needs_revision) and a PR Reviewer requesting changes… back and forth, over and over. 2 hours and a half of that. Pure thrash, burning tokens on work that produces nothing. And there were other agents coding at the same time.

On top of that I had 2 other projects open in dedicated sessions: glm-5.2, minimax-m3, kimi-k2.7, all through the same Ollama sub.

The usage bar moved from 20% to 25%.

That's it. 5% for a 2hr loop plus a coding fleet plus two side projects. On Claude Max x20 I'd already hit the wall under this exact kind of concurrent looping abuse and it the usage bar went high immediately. Way too high. And I'm only using Opus 4.6, Sonnet 4.6 and Haiku 4.5... Not even Opus 4.8, AND my main usage goes through Sonnet (the devs). Tha'ts crazy. Not a knock on Claude, the quality is excellent; but I just ran out of headroom too fast when it shouldn't have been that way. Same workload, much more expensive sub, empty bucket. $200+VAT vs $100...

That's worth saying out loud fr.

So, thanks to the Ollama team. The sub model + the flexibility made it possible to keep a 25-agent organization running through a development phase that would've otherwise just… stopped.

RoboCo isn't an agent framework. It's not a harness around one capable agent. It's not a loop architecture. It's not a workflow engine.

It's a software company. 20 AI agents and one human (me, the CEO). Open-source, AGPL, runs in my homelab.

The difference matters. Frameworks wire prompts. Harnesses make one agent more capable. Loops design how an agent reasons. None of those answer the question RoboCo is built around: who's allowed to approve a PR, who reviews QA, who can touch master.

That's an org-chart question. Not a model question.

The structure:

• CEO (me, the human)… only one who ever touches master/main branch
• Intake: interviews me to draft tasks before the Board sees them
• Board: Product Owner, Head of Marketing, Auditor (silent observer); they scope my request, write acceptance criteria, etc
• Main PM: coordinates the cells
• 3 cells (UX/UI, Frontend, Backend) each with a PM, devs, QA, documenter

Every agent has hard-gated permissions encoded in the lifecycle module. The Backend Dev physically can't approve their own PR. The QA can't be skipped. The Documenter doesn't get to write code. The roles are real, not just prompts.

The loop, for one feature: I drop a task → Board scopes it → I approve → Main PM splits across cells → cells build in parallel on isolated git workspaces → QA gates each cell → Documenters write → Main PM opens root PR → back to me for the final merge.

Last night while I was out, the backend cell shipped a full token usage instrumentation feature overnight. Vertical slice:

• Alembic migration with 3 new tables (agent_spawn_sessions, token_usage_snapshots, daily_usage_rollups)
• ORM table classes
• Pricing module (per-model rates for opus/sonnet/haiku, including cache pricing)
• Agent SDK endpoints (POST /usage/report, GET /usage/status) with additive accumulation
• Orchestrator hooks for spawn / sweep / stop, plus hourly rollup loop
• 7 analytics API endpoints (summary, time-series, by-agent, by-team, by-model, projection, cache-efficiency)
• CEO dashboard usage_summary field
• 60+ unit tests, pricing.py at 100% coverage

The backend QA agent rejected the backend dev's PR 3 times. Real bugs caught:

1. A dead except Exception as e block in the orchestrator that referenced an undefined agent_id… copy-paste error from a similar sweeper method, would've blown up at runtime if that branch ever fired
2. Acceptance-criteria violation: get_time_series() computed total_tokens as input+output only, while get_summary() included all 4 token types incl. cache. Two endpoints disagreeing on the same data.
3. Same consistency bug across the breakdown endpoints: cache tokens missing from grand totals so percentages wouldn't reconcile with /summary
4. Three F401 unused-import violations

This morning I picked up the Main PM's root PR and I rejected it 3 more times before approving. It's now in master.

That's the play: roles + a gated lifecycle + a real org chart matter more than smarter prompts.

Stack:

• FastAPI + Postgres (async SQLAlchemy) + Redis + Alembic
• piragi for RAG, pgvector, qwen3-embedding:0.6b
• Ollama (glm-5:cloud), optional self hosted
• Each agent gets its own isolated git workspace for parallel development
• TS panel served through nginx on :3000
• Agent auth via HMAC tokens. So header-trust mode default for trusted networks, ROBOCO_AGENT_AUTH_REQUIRED=true flips on strict mode w/ nginx-injected CEO token

Repo link and walkthrough with screenshots on first comment.

v0. rough edges. README explicitly specifies don't expose to the public internet (designed for trusted LAN, for now). issues/PRs are very much welcomed.