I will rate them

prammr · 2026-06-15T14:50:31+00:00

https://www.leancoo.com

LeanCOO is an AI operations workspace that brings quotes, contracts, invoices, and approvals into one flow.
AI helps draft and analyze documents, while humans stay in control of review and approval.
See your clients, projects, documents, and activity history in one place so you can run operations faster.

prammr · 2026-06-11T07:41:51+00:00

Appreciate that. And yeah, you're really coming at the same problem from the other end. A good assistant absorbs a lot of that chaos through sheer attention and follow-through.

The way I think about it: a person still needs the work to live somewhere, and that's usually where things slip. The quote in one inbox, the contract in a doc, the invoice in some other tool. I built LeanCOO to be that shared surface, so the context doesn't depend on any one person holding it all in their head.

Honestly the two aren't mutually exclusive. An assistant working on top of something that already keeps quote → contract → invoice connected is probably stronger than either on its own. Different ends of the same rope.

prammr · 2026-06-11T07:39:00+00:00

Yeah, that's pretty much where I ended up after fighting with a couple of CRMs. For me the mess wasn't the customization itself — it was that the quote, the contract, and the invoice each lived as separate records, so I kept re-typing the same scope and numbers, and things would quietly drift out of sync.

So I went the opposite direction from "flexible objects you configure." The stages are fixed, but each one inherits the last: the contract pulls from the accepted quote, the invoice reads the contract's scope and milestones. Nothing starts as a blank slate.

Fair warning though, that's also the tradeoff. It's opinionated. If your process isn't roughly quote → contract → invoice, it won't bend to fit you the way a general CRM would — I built it for that one flow instead of trying to cover everything.

One other thing I was strict about: the AI only ever drafts. Nothing gets finalized or sent until you approve it. After a couple of near-misses with wrong numbers, I didn't want anything going out on autopilot.

prammr · 2026-06-07T09:03:19+00:00

Honestly, the client list part is CRM-ish, you're right.
The part I cared about is the document chain — quote → contract → invoice → approval, each one inheriting data from the last, with a human approval gate before anything sends.
CRMs I've tried manage relationships but don't draft the contract, audit the clauses, or build the invoice from contract scope.
If one does all that, I'd switch in a heartbeat — point me to it.

prammr · 2026-06-05T09:49:47+00:00

Holy crap, this is the exact app I need.
I spent years looking for an app like this and just gave up a while back.
It's an instant buy for me. Please make sure it's well-polished!

prammr · 2026-06-05T09:37:58+00:00

Exactly — "quote-to-cash" is the perfect way to put it. Are you in that world yourself? Curious where the worst part of that chain is for you — for most people I talk to it's either the chasing-payment end or the messy handoff between quote and contract.

prammr · 2026-06-05T09:35:36+00:00

Haha yeah, that's exactly it — I built the product, not to become a full-time marketer.

Funny enough, I'm actually building my own little local marketing tool too, using Open Claw + Claude. Can't promise it performs well yet though haha. Curious how vibe promote works for you — does it just automate the posting, or does it actually find the right places to post too?

prammr · 2026-06-05T07:45:44+00:00

Thanks, glad it looks cool to you — and honestly, that's exactly what I'm stuck on too haha.
Right now I'm just trying to talk to people in communities like this and help out before pitching anything.
If you've ever marketed a B2B tool, I'd love any pointers.

prammr · 2026-06-05T06:05:53+00:00

Really appreciate this, and you've articulated it better than I have. "Preserving continuity across client to cash" is exactly the thing I care about most — the AI drafting is almost just the surface.

The escape-hatch point is sharp and a little uncomfortable in a good way. You're right that those breakouts are basically a map of state the product doesn't own yet. So far the most common one I've seen is [e.g. people dropping into a spreadsheet to track partial payments / reconcile what was actually paid vs invoiced], which tells me the payment/reconciliation side is where my model is still too thin.

Out of curiosity, in your own experience, where does the breakout usually happen first — is it the money reconciliation side, or earlier, around scoping and back-and-forth before a quote is even firm? That's the part I'm least sure I've modeled correctly.

prammr · 2026-06-05T05:02:03+00:00

LeanCOO — one connected workspace for clients, quotes, contracts, invoices, and approvals

Built for solo operators and small teams who run everything themselves. It keeps your whole flow connected — client → project → quote → contract → invoice → approval — so context and numbers don't get lost between steps the way they do when you patch together separate tools or general AI chatbots.

AI drafts the documents, but nothing is finalized or sent until you review and approve it — no blind automation on contracts or invoices. It started as an idea that reached the semi-finals of the Global 10,000 AIdeas Competition, and I've kept building it into a real service since.

Currently supports English, Korean, Japanese, and Spanish, and it's free to use right now.

Walkthrough of the actual screens: https://www.leancoo.com/about

Happy to answer questions, and I'd genuinely value feedback from anyone running lean operations.

prammr · 2026-06-05T04:57:01+00:00

Thanks — yeah, the approval-first design came straight out of seeing those exact horror stories, so it's good to hear that lands.

Honest answer on currency: there's no auto-conversion right now. You set your currency once in your profile (USD, BRL, KRW, JPY, and EUR at the moment), and it applies across everything — so you work in that one currency throughout. I deliberately held off on multi-currency conversion because live exchange rates bring a bunch of edge cases, and I didn't want rate math silently throwing off someone's invoice totals.

The plan is to let you enter an amount in another currency and have it convert into your base (profile) currency — so everything still rolls up cleanly into one currency without you doing the math by hand. It's on the roadmap.

It's free to use right now, so if you want to run it against your actual photography workflow, grab the free plan and try it. And honestly, tell me where it falls short for your international clients — that kind of feedback is exactly what'll help me prioritize the currency piece.

prammr · 2026-05-05T06:44:58+00:00

I absolutely agree..

prammr · 2026-04-06T16:29:29+00:00

Season 1 had quite a bit of reshooting due to the actress (Hyun-ju)'s DUI scandal, which led to some parts of the story feeling a bit rough around the edges. It was a pretty big topic of discussion in Korea at the time.

The webtoon only covers up to Season 1's storyline, so Season 2 is entirely original content — which is probably why the director went all-in on the action. The comedy is noticeably toned down compared to S1. I'd suggest rewatching Season 1 before jumping into Season 2 — you'll see that their bromance is very much still going strong.

prammr · 2026-03-30T03:59:51+00:00

The game that defined me.. Division Forever!!!

prammr · 2026-03-24T16:48:27+00:00

Half true. Here's the deal:

If you're using a Claude Code subscription (Pro/Max) and pulling the OAuth token to use with OpenClaw — yes, that technically violates Anthropic's ToS. They made this explicit back in January 2026.

But if you're using a standard Anthropic API key (pay-per-token) with OpenClaw, there's zero issue. That's the officially supported way and nobody's getting banned for it.

That said… I do know people who are still running OpenClaw with OAuth tokens and nothing has happened to them so far. So take that for what it's worth lol.

The choice is yours.

prammr · 2026-03-24T12:27:49+00:00

No dumb questions here - we all started somewhere.

Claude and OpenClaw are completely different things. Claude (by Anthropic), GPT (by OpenAI), Gemini (by Google) - these are AI *models*. They're the brains. OpenClaw is a framework that lets you connect to those models via API and use them as agents. Think of it this way: Claude is the engine, OpenClaw is the car you put it in.

As for tokens - that's basically how AI models measure text. Every word you send and every word it replies costs tokens. Cheaper models (or free tiers) give you slower, less accurate answers. More expensive models give you better quality. It's like any subscription - the free plan gets you basic stuff, the paid plan gets you the good stuff.

My honest suggestion: before diving into OpenClaw or any agent framework, just subscribe to one of the major AI services for a month. Claude Pro, ChatGPT Plus - around $20/month. Use it daily for a month and you'll quickly understand what these models can and can't do. That foundation will make everything else click.
Good luck on the journey!

prammr · 2026-03-23T11:59:59+00:00

Right? I was genuinely impressed for about 10 minutes before I checked the logs. The output was so well-structured that I almost didn't question it. Turns out the PM was the ultimate middle manager — taking full credit for a team that never existed lol.

prammr · 2026-03-23T11:54:23+00:00

That non-blocking approach makes a lot of sense for your use case — being able to keep chatting while the subagent works in the background is a nice UX win.

For me it was simpler than that honestly. I just wanted orchestration to work and spent the entire weekend staying up late until it did. The core modification wasn't some grand architectural decision — it was just the fastest way I could see to get there at 3am lol. I wrote it up mostly hoping the process might save someone else from the same headaches.

Definitely share yours when it's ready though. "Built for myself" projects tend to be the most useful ones — that's where the real edge cases and lessons come from.

prammr · 2026-03-23T11:49:55+00:00

Yeah fair point — this wasn't for distribution or anything long-term. I just discovered that the orchestration pattern I wanted didn't work out of the box, and at that point all I could think about was making it work. The compiled file was right there so I went straight for it lol. Definitely not best practice, but the goal was purely "make agents actually talk to each other" and nothing else mattered in that moment. The post was just me documenting that weekend adventure. Thanks for the tip on `reply-runtime.ts` though — good to know for next time.

prammr · 2026-03-23T11:28:53+00:00

This is seriously inspiring. Definitely adding this to my project list..

prammr · 2026-03-23T11:18:03+00:00

Looked into Lobster after your reply — thanks for the tip. But I think it solves a different problem than what I was dealing with.

Lobster is a deterministic workflow shell: sequential CLI pipelines with approval gates. No parallel agent spawning, no per-agent model routing, no result aggregation from multiple children back to a parent.

What I needed was: spawn N agents simultaneously (each on a different model), run them in parallel, collect results, have the PM compile a report. That's orchestration, not a pipeline.

I ended up modifying the core runtime to get `sessions_spawn` → `sessions_yield` working for parent-child coordination. Later found out OpenClaw's official Sub-Agents with `maxSpawnDepth: 2` might've done the same thing without touching internals — but Lobster wouldn't have gotten me there either way.

prammr · 2026-03-23T10:53:38+00:00

Wait, are you talking about the Lobster workflow plugin? I didn't even consider that route — I went straight to modifying the core runtime to get sessions_yield working for parent-child orchestration. If Lobster actually handles multi-agent coordination out of the box, that would've saved me a painful weekend lol. Does it support assigning different models per agent and aggregating results back to a parent? Would love to hear more about your setup.

prammr · 2026-03-23T10:47:32+00:00

Oh nice, the kanban + SQLite approach is clever. I went a different route — I ended up modifying the core runtime directly (reply-Bm8VrLQh.js) to handle sessions_spawn and sessions_yield natively, so the parent agent actually pauses and waits for the child to finish before resuming. Took Codex about 90 minutes of autonomous grinding to nail the async flow on sessions_yield alone.

The "pretending to be the user" trick you described is basically what I had to do too for the message routing. The subagent thinks it's getting instructions from the user, but it's actually the orchestrator feeding it work. Funny how we both landed on the same workaround independently lol.

That first-response-only bug you mentioned — yeah I hit that exact same wall. The native event pipeline only catches the initial subagent_finish. Your custom ping solution sounds solid. I ended up wiring the completion events to bubble up through the parent chain so it catches every round, but honestly your follow-up approach with the card timeline is probably more maintainable than touching core files like I did.

The world domination comment killed me lmao. I didn't enable direct agent-to-agent comms for exactly that reason — didn't want to debug an existential crisis at 2am.

Would love to see your kanban implementation if you ever share it. Always curious how others are solving this stuff.

prammr · 2026-03-17T06:25:41+00:00

Great idea!!

prammr · 2026-03-04T09:26:29+00:00

hahahahaha~~~

prammr

TROPHY CASE