The Coder / OpenFlows Split
If you remember only one idea from this documentation, let it be this founding asymmetry:
Coder governs where agents run. OpenFlows governs how they coordinate.
This single split explains the entire architecture, and it's worth understanding on its own.
Two providers, two jobs
OpenFlows composes two very different systems, and each does the thing it's best at - nothing else.
| Coder | OpenFlows | |
|---|---|---|
| Job | Where work runs | How work is coordinated |
| Provides | Identity and login, disposable workspaces, model gateway, audit, network policy | The team, the plan gate, adversarial review, self-healing, merges |
| Never | Decides what the team should build | Decides where work executes |
- Coder is the execution substrate. It gives you governed, ephemeral workspaces; real identities; a central place where model calls happen; and the network and admin controls that keep things safe. It provides machines and access.
- OpenFlows is the intelligence layer. It turns a pile of workspaces into a team. It plans, reviews, recovers, and merges. It provides process and judgment.
Neither duplicates the other's core job.
Why the split makes the system secure
Most of OpenFlows' security comes directly from this division:
| Property | How the split delivers it |
|---|---|
| AI calls happen only in the control plane | Through a central gateway, which means worker workspaces never hold an LLM key. |
| Git identity is a scoped OAuth link | No shared raw token ever sits in a workspace. |
| Worker workspaces are thin and disposable | No framework, no keys, tight network - because the intelligence they need lives centrally, not inside them. |
If OpenFlows tried to do Coder's job, it would have to put intelligence and credentials into every workspace, and the safety picture would collapse.
Why the split makes the system maintainable
| Reason | What it means |
|---|---|
| Each side upgrades independently | Coder can own and improve the agent loop; OpenFlows owns coordination. |
| One integration to keep | Every role is driven over one consistent interface, and OpenFlows stays a layer on top. |
| The pieces stay small and focused | Coder doesn’t think about workflow; OpenFlows doesn’t think about machines. |
Where the trusted boundary sits
There is one long-lived, trusted component - the orchestrator workspace - which legitimately holds the credentials and runs the control loop. Everything else is ephemeral and untrusted. The split tells you exactly which box to trust and why, which is the mental model you need before reading the architecture material.
One trusted place, everything else disposable