Skill: lcp14262/more-agent-orchestrator (version 1.0.0)

--- name: agent-orchestrator version: 1.0.0 description: Multi-agent collaboration and task orchestration. Decompose complex tasks, spawn sub-agents, coordinate execution, and synthesize results. author: lcp14262 license: MIT-0 repository: https://github.com/lcp14262/agent-orchestrator --- # Agent Orchestrator 🐙 **Multi-agent collaboration and task orchestration for OpenClaw.** When a single agent isn't enough — orchestrate a team. ## What It Does **Task Decomposition:** - Analyzes complex tasks - Breaks them into independent sub-tasks - Identifies dependencies and parallelization opportunities **Agent Coordination:** - Spawns sub-agents with specific instructions - Manages concurrent execution - Handles inter-agent communication - Monitors progress and health **Result Synthesis:** - Collects results from all sub-agents - Resolves conflicts and inconsistencies - Synthesizes final deliverable - Provides execution summary ## When to Use **Trigger Phrases:** - "Break this down and have multiple agents work on it" - "Coordinate several agents to..." - "Parallelize this task" - "Have agents collaborate on..." - "Orchestrate a team to..." - "Decompose and distribute..." **Use Cases:** 1. **Research Projects** - Different agents research different aspects 2. **Code Reviews** - Multiple agents review different files/modules 3. **Data Analysis** - Parallel analysis of different datasets 4. **Content Creation** - Agents write different sections, then synthesize 5. **Testing** - Parallel test execution across scenarios 6. **Complex Workflows** - Multi-step processes with dependencies ## Quick Start ### Basic Usage ``` Orchestrate this: Research the top 5 AI frameworks and compare their features, performance, and community support. ``` The orchestrator will: 1. Decompose into sub-tasks (one per framework) 2. Spawn 5 sub-agents 3. Each agent researches one framework 4. Synthesize comparison report ### Advanced Usage ``` Orchestrate with options: - Task: Analyze our Q4 sales data - Agents: 4 (by region: North/South/East/West) - Parallel: true - Synthesis: consolidated_report ``` ## Architecture ``` ┌─────────────────┐ │ Orchestrator │ │ (Main) │ └────────┬────────┘ │ ┌────┴────┬────────────┐ │ │ │ ┌───▼───┐ ┌──▼────┐ ┌────▼────┐ │Agent 1│ │Agent 2│ │Agent 3 │ │ Task A│ │ Task B│ │ Task C │ └───┬───┘ └───┬───┘ └────┬────┘ │ │ │ └─────────┴────────────┘ │ ┌────▼────┐ │Synthesis│ │ Result │ └─────────┘ ``` ## Configuration ### Task Decomposition Strategy | Strategy | Description | Best For | |----------|-------------|----------| | `parallel` | All sub-tasks run concurrently | Independent tasks | | `sequential` | Tasks run one after another | Dependent tasks | | `hybrid` | Mix of parallel and sequential | Complex workflows | ### Agent Allocation | Mode | Description | Use Case | |------|-------------|----------| | `auto` | Orchestrator decides agent count | General purpose | | `fixed` | Specific number of agents | Resource-constrained | | `per_task` | One agent per sub-task | Maximum parallelization | ### Synthesis Options | Option | Description | |--------|-------------| | `merge` | Combine all results as-is | | `summarize` | Generate executive summary | | `compare` | Highlight differences and similarities | | `consolidate` | Merge with conflict resolution | ## Examples ### Example 1: Market Research ``` Task: Research the competitive landscape for project management software Decomposition: - Agent 1: Analyze Asana features and pricing - Agent 2: Analyze Monday.com features and pricing - Agent 3: Analyze Notion features and pricing - Agent 4: Analyze ClickUp features and pricing - Agent 5: Analyze emerging competitors Synthesis: Comparative analysis report with recommendations ``` ### Example 2: Code Review ``` Task: Review the entire codebase for security vulnerabilities Decomposition: - Agent 1: Review authentication module - Agent 2: Review API endpoints - Agent 3: Review database queries - Agent 4: Review file handling - Agent 5: Review third-party dependencies Synthesis: Security audit report with prioritized fixes ``` ### Example 3: Content Creation ``` Task: Write a comprehensive guide to OpenClaw skills Decomposition: - Agent 1: Introduction and setup - Agent 2: Basic skill structure - Agent 3: Advanced patterns - Agent 4: Best practices - Agent 5: Troubleshooting Synthesis: Complete guide with consistent voice and formatting ``` ## Implementation Details ### Task Decomposition Algorithm 1. **Analyze** the main task for scope and complexity 2. **Identify** natural breakpoints and independent components 3. **Estimate** effort for each component 4. **Group** related components into sub-tasks 5. **Determine** dependencies between sub-tasks 6. **Output** structured task list with metadata ### Sub-Agent Spawning ```json { "runtime": "subagent", "mode": "run", "task": "<specific sub-task>", "timeoutSeconds": 300, "streamTo": "parent" } ``` ### Progress Tracking - Track each sub-agent's status: `pending` → `running` → `completed`/`failed` - Monitor execution time - Handle timeouts and retries - Report progress to main session ### Conflict Resolution When sub-agents produce conflicting results: 1. **Flag** the conflict 2. **Request** clarification from each agent 3. **Escalate** to human if unresolved 4. **Document** the resolution ## Error Handling ### Sub-Agent Failures | Error | Handling | |-------|----------| | Timeout | Retry once with extended timeout | | Crash | Spawn replacement agent | | Invalid output | Request clarification | | Resource exhausted | Queue and retry later | ### Synthesis Failures | Error | Handling | |-------|----------| | Missing results | Proceed with available data, flag gaps | | Conflicting data | Flag for human review | | Format mismatch | Normalize before merging | ## Best Practices ### Do's ✅ **Clear task boundaries** - Each sub-task should be self-contained ✅ **Explicit success criteria** - Define what "done" looks like ✅ **Reasonable timeouts** - Account for complexity ✅ **Progressive synthesis** - Synthesize as results arrive ✅ **Human escalation** - Know when to involve the user ### Don'ts ❌ **Over-parallelize** - Too many agents creates coordination overhead ❌ **Vague instructions** - Sub-agents need clear, specific tasks ❌ **Ignore dependencies** - Sequential tasks must respect order ❌ **Blind synthesis** - Review before merging conflicting results ❌ **No fallback** - Always have a plan B for failures ## Limitations - **Context limits** - Each sub-agent has independent context - **Coordination overhead** - More agents = more management - **Cost** - Multiple agents = higher token usage - **Complexity** - Debugging multi-agent flows is harder ## Troubleshooting ### Problem: Sub-agents produce inconsistent results **Solution:** 1. Standardize the output format in task instructions 2. Add validation step before synthesis 3. Use `compare` synthesis mode to highlight differences ### Problem: Task takes too long **Solution:** 1. Increase parallelization 2. Reduce scope per agent 3. Set aggressive timeouts with retries ### Problem: Results are too fragmented **Solution:** 1. Use `consolidate` synthesis mode 2. Add explicit integration step 3. Assign one agent to "editor" role ## API Reference ### Orchestrate Command ``` orchestrate <task> [options] Options: --agents <n> Number of sub-agents (default: auto) --mode <mode> Execution mode: parallel|sequential|hybrid --timeout <sec> Timeout per sub-agent (default: 300) --synthesis <type> Synthesis type: merge|summarize|compare|consolidate --verbose Show detailed progress ``` ### Status Command ``` orchestrate status <session_id> Shows current orchestration session status ``` ## Changelog ### v1.0.0 (2026-03-12) - Initial release - Task decomposition - Sub-agent spawning and coordination - Result synthesis - Progress tracking - Error handling ## License MIT --- *Part of the multi-agent toolkit for OpenClaw* *"Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much."*


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: clean (LOW)