Multi-Agent Architect
Design and orchestrate multi-agent systems. Use when building complex AI systems requiring specialization, parallel processing, or collaborative problem-solving. Covers agent coordination, communication patterns, and task delegation strategies.
Packaged view
This page reorganizes the original catalog entry around fit, installability, and workflow context first. The original raw source lives below.
Install command
npx @skill-hub/cli install daffy0208-ai-dev-standards-multi-agent-architect
Repository
Skill path: skills/multi-agent-architect
Design and orchestrate multi-agent systems. Use when building complex AI systems requiring specialization, parallel processing, or collaborative problem-solving. Covers agent coordination, communication patterns, and task delegation strategies.
Open repositoryBest for
Primary workflow: Design Product.
Technical facets: Full Stack, Data / AI, Designer.
Target audience: everyone.
License: Unknown.
Original source
Catalog source: SkillHub Club.
Repository owner: daffy0208.
This is still a mirrored public skill entry. Review the repository before installing into production workflows.
What it helps with
- Install Multi-Agent Architect into Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, or OpenCode workflows
- Review https://github.com/daffy0208/ai-dev-standards before adding Multi-Agent Architect to shared team environments
- Use Multi-Agent Architect for development workflows
Works across
Favorites: 0.
Sub-skills: 0.
Aggregator: No.
Original source / Raw SKILL.md
---
name: Multi-Agent Architect
description: Design and orchestrate multi-agent systems. Use when building complex AI systems requiring specialization, parallel processing, or collaborative problem-solving. Covers agent coordination, communication patterns, and task delegation strategies.
version: 1.0.0
---
# Multi-Agent Architect
Design systems where multiple specialized agents collaborate to solve complex problems.
## Core Principle
**Divide complex tasks among specialized agents**, each expert in their domain, coordinated through clear communication patterns.
## When to Use Multi-Agent Systems
### Use Multi-Agent When:
- ✅ Task requires multiple specializations (research + writing + coding)
- ✅ Parallel processing speeds up solution (independent subtasks)
- ✅ Need self-correction through peer review
- ✅ Complex workflows with decision points
- ✅ Scaling single-agent becomes unwieldy
### Don't Use Multi-Agent When:
- ❌ Single agent can handle task efficiently
- ❌ Task is simple and linear
- ❌ Communication overhead > parallelization benefit
- ❌ Team lacks multi-agent debugging expertise
---
## Multi-Agent Patterns
### Pattern 1: Sequential Pipeline
**Use**: Multi-step workflow where each agent builds on previous
```
User Query → Researcher → Analyst → Writer → Editor → Output
```
**Example**: Research report generation
1. Researcher: Gather sources
2. Analyst: Synthesize findings
3. Writer: Draft report
4. Editor: Refine and format
**Pros**: Clear dependencies, easy to debug
**Cons**: Sequential (no parallelization), bottlenecks
---
### Pattern 2: Hierarchical (Manager-Worker)
**Use**: Complex task broken into parallel subtasks
```
Manager Agent
/ | \
Worker 1 Worker 2 Worker 3
(Search) (Analyze) (Summarize)
\ | /
Aggregator Agent
```
**Example**: Market research across competitors
- Manager: Decompose into per-competitor analysis
- Workers: Research competitor A, B, C in parallel
- Aggregator: Combine findings
**Pros**: Parallelization, specialization
**Cons**: Manager complexity, coordination overhead
---
### Pattern 3: Peer Collaboration (Round Table)
**Use**: Multiple perspectives improve quality
```
Coder ↔ Reviewer ↔ Tester
↓ ↓ ↓
Consensus
```
**Example**: Code generation with review
1. Coder: Write initial code
2. Reviewer: Check for issues
3. Tester: Validate functionality
4. Iterate until consensus
**Pros**: Quality through review, self-correction
**Cons**: May not converge, expensive (multiple LLM calls)
---
### Pattern 4: Agent Swarm
**Use**: Many agents explore solution space independently
```
Agent 1 → Candidate Solution 1
Agent 2 → Candidate Solution 2
Agent 3 → Candidate Solution 3
↓
Selector (pick best)
```
**Example**: Creative brainstorming
- 5 agents generate different approaches
- Selector evaluates and picks best
**Pros**: Exploration, creativity
**Cons**: Cost (N agents), may produce similar solutions
---
## Communication Patterns
### 1. Shared Memory
```python
shared_state = {
"research_findings": [],
"current_task": "analyze_competitors",
"decisions": []
}
# All agents read/write to shared state
researcher.execute(shared_state)
analyst.execute(shared_state)
```
**Pros**: Simple, all agents see full context
**Cons**: Race conditions, hard to debug who changed what
---
### 2. Message Passing
```python
# Agent A sends message to Agent B
message = {
"from": "researcher",
"to": "analyst",
"content": research_findings,
"metadata": {"confidence": 0.9}
}
message_queue.send(message)
```
**Pros**: Clear communication flow, traceable
**Cons**: More complex to implement
---
### 3. Event-Driven
```python
# Agents subscribe to events
event_bus.subscribe("research_complete", analyst.on_research_complete)
event_bus.subscribe("analysis_complete", writer.on_analysis_complete)
# Agent publishes event when done
event_bus.publish("research_complete", research_data)
```
**Pros**: Loose coupling, scalable
**Cons**: Harder to follow execution flow
---
## Agent Coordination Strategies
### 1. Fixed Workflow
Predefined sequence, no dynamic decisions
```python
workflow = [
("researcher", gather_info),
("analyst", analyze_data),
("writer", create_report)
]
for agent_name, task in workflow:
result = agents[agent_name].execute(task, context)
context.update(result)
```
**Use**: Predictable tasks, clear dependencies
---
### 2. Dynamic Routing
Manager decides next agent based on context
```python
class ManagerAgent:
def route_task(self, task, context):
if requires_technical_expertise(task):
return tech_specialist
elif requires_creative_input(task):
return creative_agent
else:
return generalist
```
**Use**: Tasks vary significantly, need flexibility
---
### 3. Consensus-Based
Agents vote or reach agreement
```python
proposals = [agent.propose_solution(task) for agent in agents]
scores = [agent.evaluate(proposals) for agent in agents]
best = proposals[argmax(mean(scores))]
```
**Use**: High-stakes decisions, quality critical
---
## Implementation with CrewAI
**CrewAI Pattern** (Role-based teams):
```python
from crewai import Agent, Task, Crew
# Define specialized agents
researcher = Agent(
role="Research Specialist",
goal="Gather comprehensive information on {topic}",
backstory="Expert researcher with 10 years experience",
tools=[search_tool, scrape_tool]
)
analyst = Agent(
role="Data Analyst",
goal="Synthesize research findings into insights",
backstory="Data scientist specialized in trend analysis",
tools=[analysis_tool]
)
writer = Agent(
role="Technical Writer",
goal="Create clear, compelling reports",
backstory="Professional writer with technical expertise",
tools=[writing_tool]
)
# Define tasks
research_task = Task(
description="Research {topic} thoroughly",
agent=researcher,
expected_output="Comprehensive research findings with sources"
)
analysis_task = Task(
description="Analyze research findings for key insights",
agent=analyst,
context=[research_task], # Depends on research_task
expected_output="List of key insights and trends"
)
writing_task = Task(
description="Write executive summary based on analysis",
agent=writer,
context=[research_task, analysis_task],
expected_output="500-word executive summary"
)
# Create crew and execute
crew = Crew(
agents=[researcher, analyst, writer],
tasks=[research_task, analysis_task, writing_task],
verbose=True
)
result = crew.kickoff(inputs={"topic": "AI market trends"})
```
---
## Implementation with LangGraph
**LangGraph Pattern** (State machines):
```python
from langgraph.graph import StateGraph, END
class AgentState(TypedDict):
input: str
research: str
analysis: str
output: str
def research_node(state):
research = researcher_agent.run(state["input"])
return {"research": research}
def analysis_node(state):
analysis = analyst_agent.run(state["research"])
return {"analysis": analysis}
def writing_node(state):
output = writer_agent.run(state["analysis"])
return {"output": output}
# Build graph
workflow = StateGraph(AgentState)
workflow.add_node("research", research_node)
workflow.add_node("analysis", analysis_node)
workflow.add_node("writing", writing_node)
workflow.set_entry_point("research")
workflow.add_edge("research", "analysis")
workflow.add_edge("analysis", "writing")
workflow.add_edge("writing", END)
app = workflow.compile()
# Execute
result = app.invoke({"input": "Analyze AI market trends"})
```
---
## Best Practices
### 1. Clear Agent Roles
Each agent should have specific expertise and responsibilities
### 2. Minimize Communication
More agents = more coordination overhead. Start simple.
### 3. Idempotent Operations
Agents should be restartable without side effects
### 4. Failure Handling
Design for agent failures (retry, fallback, skip)
### 5. Observable Execution
Log agent decisions, trace execution flow
### 6. Cost Management
Track token usage per agent, optimize expensive calls
---
## Common Multi-Agent Mistakes
❌ **Too many agents** → Start with 2-3, add only if needed
❌ **Unclear responsibilities** → Define explicit roles
❌ **No failure handling** → One agent failure breaks entire system
❌ **Synchronous bottlenecks** → Parallelize independent agents
❌ **Ignoring costs** → N agents = N× LLM calls
❌ **Over-engineering** → Single agent often sufficient
---
## Decision Framework: Single vs Multi-Agent
```
Task Complexity?
│
├─ Simple, linear → Single Agent
│
├─ Complex, requires specialization?
│ │
│ ├─ Sequential steps → Pipeline Pattern
│ ├─ Parallel subtasks → Hierarchical Pattern
│ ├─ Need review → Peer Collaboration
│ └─ Explore solutions → Swarm Pattern
│
└─ Uncertain → Start with Single Agent, refactor to Multi if needed
```
---
## Monitoring & Debugging
```python
# Track agent execution
class TrackedAgent(Agent):
def execute(self, task, context):
start = time.time()
logger.info(f"{self.name} starting: {task}")
result = super().execute(task, context)
duration = time.time() - start
logger.info(f"{self.name} completed in {duration}s")
metrics.record({
"agent": self.name,
"task": task,
"duration": duration,
"tokens": result.token_count,
"cost": result.cost
})
return result
```
**Key Metrics**:
- Agent execution time
- Token usage per agent
- Success/failure rates
- Handoff delays
- Overall workflow duration
---
## Related Resources
**Related Skills**:
- `rag-implementer` - For knowledge-grounded agents
- `knowledge-graph-builder` - For agent knowledge bases
- `api-designer` - For agent communication APIs
**Related Patterns**:
- `META/DECISION-FRAMEWORK.md` - Framework selection (CrewAI vs LangGraph)
- `STANDARDS/architecture-patterns/multi-agent-pattern.md` - Agent architectures (when created)
**Related Playbooks**:
- `PLAYBOOKS/deploy-multi-agent-system.md` - Deployment guide (when created)
- `PLAYBOOKS/debug-agent-workflows.md` - Debugging procedures (when created)