Multi-Agent Orchestration Patterns
Supervisor workers, pipelines, and when one agent is enough.
Start with one agent
The most common architectural mistake in agent products is splitting into multiple agents too early. Most MVPs need a single agent with 5-8 well-designed tools, not a swarm of specialists.
Multiple agents add coordination overhead, increase latency (each handoff adds 2-5 seconds), multiply failure points, and make debugging exponentially harder. A single agent with good tools and a clear system prompt handles 80% of workflows.
Split into multiple agents only when roles are truly distinct and sequential: a researcher that gathers data, a writer that drafts content, and a reviewer that checks quality. If the tasks overlap or require shared context, keep them in one agent. You can always refactor to multi-agent later when you have production data showing where the single agent bottlenecks.
Supervisor pattern
The supervisor pattern uses a planner agent that decomposes complex tasks into subtasks, delegates to specialist agents, and merges results. It works well for multi-step reports, research projects, and workflows that touch 5+ systems.
Example: a 'quarterly business review' agent where a supervisor delegates to a data agent (pulls metrics from analytics), a comparison agent (benchmarks against industry), and a writing agent (drafts the narrative). Each specialist has focused tools and prompts optimized for its subtask.
The tradeoff is latency and cost. A supervisor workflow that takes 30-60 seconds is fine for async jobs (reports, batch processing) but unacceptable for real-time interactive experiences. Always show progress to the user ('Gathering metrics... Drafting analysis... Reviewing for accuracy...').
4 more sections in this article
- Human checkpoints
- Pipelines and when they fit
- State and handoff
- Debugging a multi-agent failure
This is Pro content
Get Agent Factory Pro - a one-time payment for lifetime access to full articles, complete build prompts, and everything new.
Use it
The parts of the library that put this article to work.
Published 27 July 2026. Last reviewed 17 August 2026. We re-read this library on a schedule and date every article, so you can see for yourself how current it is.