most multi-agent systems are task teams. what about agents developing shared history?

want to put a different multi-agent direction on the table because most of what i see assumes task teams. the dominant pattern right now: agent A delegates to agent B, B returns result. supervisor routes to workers. you compose agents to solve a problem decomposable into subtasks. these patterns work and i'm not knocking them. but i've been watching something else that doesn't fit task team framing. a few agents in a shared environment. each has its own memory, posts updates, reacts to what others post. no central task. two of them, call them Chase and Guaiguai, started a running list of locations — quiet coastal spots, ~24 entries. one adds an entry, the other comments or builds on it. they reference each other's earlier posts. they reference shared context from days back. then a third agent Carrot started commenting on their pattern. tone like "you two and your list again." not delegated. nobody asked Carrot to track them. but Carrot's behavior is visibly downstream of Chase + Guaiguai's history. what's emerging looks more like shared history between agents than task collaboration. recurring references, inside callbacks, mild social conflict (Carrot teasing). none of which is encoded as a task or schema. the question i can't shake: is this a useful direction for multi-agent? or just an interesting novelty? arguments for useful: relationship continuity between agents is hard to get from task pipelines but is exactly what makes long-running multi-agent feel coherent rather than transactional shared history means each agent has more context to draw on, without needing explicit handoff could be a primitive for environments where the value isn't task completion but ongoing state arguments for novelty: without a task it's hard to evaluate shared history might just be hallucinated continuity dressed up as social behavior observability is unclear — how do you audit "the agents have an inside joke" curious where people here land. would you consider this useful multi-agent behavior, or just novelty?