more-agent-orchestrator
v1.0.0Multi-agent collaboration and task orchestration. Decompose complex tasks, spawn sub-agents, coordinate execution, and synthesize results.
Installation
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
- Analyze the main task for scope and complexity
- Identify natural breakpoints and independent components
- Estimate effort for each component
- Group related components into sub-tasks
- Determine dependencies between sub-tasks
- Output structured task list with metadata
Sub-Agent Spawning
{
"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:
- Flag the conflict
- Request clarification from each agent
- Escalate to human if unresolved
- 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."