Skip to content
Vibecoding Guide

Multi-Agent Patterns

A multi-agent setup uses more than one Claude instance working on the same goal — one coordinating, others executing. This makes it possible to parallelize work, isolate context per task, and review output with a fresh set of eyes before accepting it.

A single Claude session accumulates context. After a long session, Claude is carrying the entire conversation history — earlier decisions, wrong turns, corrections — which can cause it to conflate tasks or drift from the original goal.

A fresh agent has none of that baggage. It reads only what you give it, which makes its output more predictable and easier to review.

The most common pattern: one agent coordinates (breaks down the task, dispatches work, reviews results) while separate agents execute individual tasks.

The coordinator never writes code — it only reasons about what needs to happen and whether it happened correctly. Executors never see the full plan — they get exactly the context needed for their task.

Use multi-agent when:

  • A task has multiple independent steps that don’t share state
  • You want a second opinion on output before accepting it (spec review, quality review)
  • A session has grown long enough that context pollution is a real risk
  • You want to run different models for different roles (cheap model for mechanical work, capable model for review)

Don’t use it when:

  • Tasks are tightly sequential and each step depends on the previous one’s output
  • The overhead of coordinating agents outweighs the benefit
  • A single well-scoped prompt would do the job

Agents don’t share memory. The coordinator must explicitly pass everything an executor needs: the task description, relevant file contents, constraints, and expected output format.

The more precisely the coordinator briefs the executor, the less back-and-forth is needed.

A review agent is a special case: its only job is to read another agent’s output and check it against a spec. It has no implementation context — just the requirement and the result. This is what makes it useful. A reviewer that doesn’t know what the implementer was thinking gives more honest feedback.

See Superpowers Skills for how the subagent-driven-development skill implements this pattern.