I run more than ten Hermes agents across several servers.
That sounds powerful.
I also got a real headache.
Some agents write code. Some review project state. Some watch for problems. Some help me decide what to do next.
This is useful. It is also a lot to manage.
The hard part is not asking an agent to do work. The hard part is knowing:
I have ADHD. Too many open loops can turn a good agent setup into stress.
So I use Hermes Agent as my control plane.
By "control plane", I mean the place where I check state, make a choice, and pick the next safe action.
My control plane is mostly Markdown files.
I call them anchors.
An anchor is a small control sheet. It stores facts that should not live only in chat history.
An anchor can track:
This sounds boring. That is the point.
Boring files are easy to read. They are easy to update. They are easy for Hermes to use in the next session.
Without anchors, each chat has to rebuild the world. With anchors, Hermes can check the files, update them, and give me a short answer.
The goal is not more notes. The goal is less load on my brain.
The loop looks like this:
me on Telegram
↓
Hermes Gateway
↓
Claw, one of my Hermes agents
↓
SSH checks over Tailscale + files + cron + memory + skills + session search
↓
Markdown anchors
↓
short report: best pick, blocker, next action
Hermes Agent works well here because it is not just chat.
It can use tools. It can read and write files. It can run shell commands. It can run cron jobs. It has memory. It can search old sessions. It can use skills.
That mix makes it useful for daily ops.
One boring but important piece is Tailscale.
My agents and servers are not all on one public machine. Tailscale gives them a private network with stable names and safe access paths. That makes managing many agents much easier:
For me, Hermes is the control plane and Tailscale is the private road between the machines.
I often ask:
codex status?
Hermes checks several worker nodes. It reads the live model limits. It updates the capacity anchor. Then it gives me a short routing answer.
Here is a redacted example:
Best pick: node-c
Fallback: node-d
- node-a / control-node / account-a
GPT-5.5: 33%, reset 20:14
Spark: 91%, reset 6/3 14:57
- node-b / worker-node / account-b
GPT-5.5: 12%, reset 20:13
Spark: 100%, reset 6/6 02:11
- node-c / worker-node / account-c
GPT-5.5: 75%, reset 5/31 10:52
Spark: 100%, reset 6/6 02:11
- node-d / worker-node / account-d
GPT-5.5: 66%, reset 23:30
Spark: 100%, reset 6/6 02:11
The key part is "Best pick" at the top.
I do not want a wall of data. I want the choice first, then enough proof to trust it.
I also use Hermes cron jobs for checks that should stay quiet when all is well.
A security check might look at:
If all checks pass, it sends nothing.
If something is wrong, it sends a short alert:
auditd watchdog
node-c:
- audit log is too large
- next: rotate the log and check auditd again
This matters.
If a reminder says "all good" every day, I learn to ignore it. Quiet success saves attention for real problems.
When many agents work at once, ownership can get messy.
So I keep a small registry:
Claw
- Role: control plane, QA, memory keeper, ops helper.
- Work: maintain anchors, route model work, read monitoring reports.
Builder Agent
- Role: main builder for project-alpha.
- Rule: Claw can inspect and report, but should not take over unless asked.
node-c / worker-node
- Role: best node for long work right now.
- Note: check ownership before touching active project folders.
This stops a common problem: two helpful agents changing the same repo because nobody wrote down who owns it.
A good Claw report is small:
Answer first.
Evidence second.
Blocker only if real.
One next action.
This is not just style. It is part of the system.
For me, support means:
Hermes can take on a lot of that load.
You do not need ten agents to use this idea.
Start with one file:
## Current owner
Claw
## Active agents
- Builder: owns project-alpha
- Reviewer: reviews pull requests only
- Ops: checks servers and cron
## Safe next action
Ask Claw to summarize blockers and pick one next step.
## Do not touch
- active production deploys
- repos owned by another agent
Then ask Hermes:
Read agent-team-anchor.md.
Update stale facts if needed.
Tell me:
1. best next action
2. real blocker, if any
3. which agent owns the work
Keep it under 8 lines.
That is the smallest version of my control plane.
If an agent only uses chat history, it will miss things. Put the current state in a file.
Not every fact belongs in long term memory.
I split it like this:
That keeps memory clean.
A cron job should help me act. If it has nothing useful to say, it should stay silent.
I do not publish real host names, account names, IPs, tokens, or private project names.
The public examples keep the shape of the work, not the private details.
Dashboards are good when I need to dig.
For daily work, a short message is often better:
Best pick: node-c.
Blocker: node-b is low on capacity.
Next: send long work to node-c.
I want to make the anchor files easier to check.
Next steps:
I would still keep Markdown as the base.
A human should be able to open the file and understand what is going on.
I wrote this article with help from Hermes Agent itself.
The examples are redacted from a real workflow. I changed host names, account names, IPs, session IDs, and project names.
Hermes Agent is an open source project by Nous Research. Claw is my own way of using Hermes Agent as a daily control plane.
Hermes did not give me more agents.
It gave me a way to see what my agents are doing.
The agents check, write, route, remember, and report. I still choose what matters, what is safe, and what should happen next.
My headache is getting better.
That is the difference between having many agents and having a working agent team.