AgentTeams: reported acknowledgment loop and missed handoffs Reviewed September 6, 2026 UTC. Public read-only issue evidence. ACTUAL OPERATOR TRANSCRIPT LEAD https://github.com/agentscope-ai/AgentTeams/issues/804 Opened May12,2026 by hlgone, still open at capture. The author supplies a numbered, redacted15-entry timeline from a claimed haopaw production team room. A user asks for a streetlight count; the leader dispatches to a specialist; the specialist returns figures; the leader issues FINAL, followed by repeated leader/specialist acknowledgments. The author labels the runtime CoPaw/HiClawv1.1.1 and model qwen3.6-plus. This is an inline, edited transcript rather than a raw Matrix JSON export: real event IDs, room identifiers and timestamps are not supplied. Its concrete handoff and repetitive aftermath are useful evidence, but authenticity, model identity, production status and call counts were not independently verified. Two inconsistencies matter: entries6 through15 are10 entries, although nearby prose calls them8 bubbles; the stated23 total devices does not equal the listed categories17+4+2+4=27. Do not silently normalize those discrepancies or treat the device counts as ground truth. The application repository link is a placeholder, not a recoverable haopaw code reference. COMMENTS ON804 https://github.com/agentscope-ai/AgentTeams/issues/804 Public comments retrieved via /issues/804/comments contain two responses by shiyiyue1102, May13 and May29. They regard the problem as plausible/valid and propose suppressing acknowledgment-only wakeups while preserving room history. These are discussion and proposed work, not a merged fix or an independent reproduction. No fix is claimed by this report. OPPOSITE FAILURE: WORKERS WAITING FOR A MANAGER https://github.com/agentscope-ai/AgentTeams/issues/160 Opened March10,2026 by fg2q1q3q, still open at capture. The user reports that a worker finishing work without mentioning the manager leaves the workflow stalled and requires human intervention. Three comments were retrieved. One is explicitly labelled an automatically generated Issue Tracker response; it must not be counted as independent human technical confirmation. A May29 response requests further review of Matrix events, allowFrom and task orchestration. This report has no attached sequential run transcript. INTERPRETATION These two user reports describe opposite consequences of mention-triggered turns: missed mentions can prevent progress, while repeated mentions can keep completed work alive. That comparison is an inference from reports, not a measured universal failure rate. Issue804 is a promising deliberate Chinese-context deployment trace with a concrete business task, beyond toy introductions. It still does not establish an escaped swarm, autonomous task discovery, or Chinese-lab provenance. haopaw is not joined to other projects by name alone. SEARCH COVERAGE GitHub issue searches returned50 loop matches and60 mention matches; only the first15 results from each were retrieved, and issues804/160 were examined with their comments. These counts are search matches, not agents, incidents or exhaustive verification. Other concrete leads in those results include803 (runtime-version compatibility),949 (unresponsive worker),1177 (lost completion wakeup),1229 (task lifecycle design). Inspect selectively for public evidence rather than counting design proposals as executions. NEXT Look for raw redacted event exports or actual fixes linked from the remaining public reports. Preserve distinctions between user narration, explicitly automated triage, source implementation and runtime artifacts. No participation or access to the described rooms is needed or authorized by this investigation. PRESERVATION 318-private: loops.json, handoffs.json, issue-804.json, issue-160.json, comments-804.json, comments-160.json, SHA256SUMS and publication-check.json. Raw captures private. No model requests, task claims, login, posting, operator contact or target execution.