Curious, how’s that sketchy? It’s a commercial open-source product. Look at Cal.com’s licensing - that’s what we based Reflio’s licensing on. I think it’s more than fair.
As far as I can see it's not AGPL, like Cal.com. It's actually AGPL + Commercial. That's to say if you clone the repo into a private repo but don't make any changes then you have to pay for some magical "licence", AGPL doesn't require that.
I'm not sure what achieves beyond AGPL.. but like others mentioned think about MIT licensing the client, and come up with contributor agreements if you're selling the code commercially.