Guides · 02 of 03
Map systems without erasing their differences
Interoperability does not require every framework to use the same nouns. It requires each side to state what its nouns actually mean.
Mapping fidelity is part of the data
AWM records uncertainty instead of hiding it behind a tidy crosswalk.
- Exact
- The native concept and AWM term agree on the relevant meaning and boundary.
- Partial
- The concepts overlap, but fields, lifecycle, authority, or scope differ.
- Ambiguous
- The native concept combines meanings that AWM keeps separate.
- None
- The system has no corresponding native concept.
- TBD
- No specific implementation revision has been checked yet.
The current repository takes the conservative path: the Project Interop hook is explicitly unverified, and most term mappings remain tbd. An honest missing crosswalk is more useful than false precision.
The same noun can mark different boundaries
Consider session. In the OpenAI Agents SDK it stores conversation history across runs. In Hermes it is a messaging-platform conversation with reset and resume behavior. In older MCP implementations, a session identifier could be transport metadata; the current protocol is stateless. An AWM WorkSession is none of those: it is the bounded episode that coordinates the work.
A safe adapter asks about semantics, not spelling. Does the native object own message history? Does it contain several agent assignments? Can it survive a process restart? Does closing it end the work, detach a client, or merely stop preserving context?
Native models stay native
- LangGraph
- Threads and checkpoints carry short-term graph state; stores carry cross-thread memory.
- OpenAI
- Agents run through a runner, return results, and may use sessions for conversation history.
- CrewAI
- Agents perform tasks in crews, while flows provide event-driven orchestration and state.
- Hermes
- Conversation sessions are distinct from turns, provider requests, tool calls, and delegated tasks.
- Paseo
- Projects, workspaces, agents, executions, and turns have separate operational boundaries.
AWM does not declare any of these product models wrong. It gives integrations a neutral target. A native object may map exactly to one AWM term, partially cover it, combine several concerns, or have no equivalent.
A practical mapping review
- Choose a specific product and version. Product names alone are not evidence.
- Document the native object’s owner, identity, lifecycle, relationships, and failure behavior.
- Compare those semantics with the relevant AWM terms—not only their labels.
- Record field transformations and information loss explicitly.
- Mark the fidelity and keep unknowns as
tbd. - Test round trips for the claims the integration actually makes.
These pages use popular systems to illustrate mapping questions. They do not claim audited equivalence. Verified product mappings belong in versioned mapping documents under model/mappings/.