dispatching-parallel-agents

krzemienski's avatarfrom krzemienski

Use for 3+ independent failures - dispatches parallel subagents with Shannon wave coordination, success scoring (0.00-1.00) per domain, and MCP result aggregation

⭐1stars🔀0forks📁View on GitHub🕐Updated Dec 31, 2025⬇️1downloads

When & Why to Use This Skill

This Claude skill enables the parallel orchestration of multiple subagents to resolve three or more independent system failures simultaneously. By utilizing Shannon wave coordination and quantitative success scoring, it optimizes debugging workflows, reduces sequential time costs, and provides comprehensive result aggregation through MCP (Model Context Protocol). It is designed to maximize efficiency in complex environments where multiple unrelated issues need urgent attention.

Use Cases

  • Parallel Debugging: Simultaneously fixing 3+ independent test failures across different subsystems to reduce total resolution time and improve developer productivity.
  • Multi-Domain Investigation: Dispatching specialized agents to analyze unrelated root causes in complex software architectures without shared state interference.
  • Concurrent QA Testing: Running independent validation tasks across multiple modules with automated success scoring and automated conflict detection.
  • Efficiency Optimization: Reducing the 'sequential cost' of troubleshooting by executing non-dependent tasks in parallel waves with real-time performance tracking.
namedispatching-parallel-agents
descriptionUse for 3+ independent failures - dispatches parallel subagents with Shannon wave coordination, success scoring (0.00-1.00) per domain, and MCP result aggregation

Dispatching Parallel Agents (Shannon-Enhanced)

Overview

Parallel investigation of independent failures with quantitative success tracking.

Dispatch one agent per independent problem domain. Shannon enhancement adds wave-based coordination, numerical success scoring, and MCP result aggregation.

Success Scoring (0.00-1.00):

  • Per-domain: agent_success_score = (problems_fixed / problems_identified)
  • Overall: parallel_efficiency = (domains_completed_concurrently / sequential_cost)

When to Use

3+ independent failures?
├─ Yes, independent domains?
│  ├─ Yes → Parallel dispatch (optimal)
│  └─ No → Sequential investigation
└─ No → Single agent focus

Dispatch when:

  • 3+ test files failing with different root causes
  • Multiple subsystems broken independently
  • Each problem understood without context from others
  • No shared state between investigations

Don't dispatch:

  • Failures are related (fix one might fix others)
  • Agents need full system state understanding
  • Would interfere with each other's work

The Pattern

1. Identify Independent Domains

Group failures by subsystem:

Domain A: Tool approval flow (file_a_test)
Domain B: Batch completion (file_b_test)
Domain C: Abort functionality (file_c_test)

Independence check: Fixing Domain A doesn't touch Domain B/C code paths.

2. Assign Success Metrics

# Per-domain scoring (Serena)
per_domain_metrics = {
  domain: "Tool approval",
  problems_identified: 3,
  initial_root_cause_clarity: 0.6,  # 0-1.0
  estimated_complexity: 0.7,        # 0-1.0
}

3. Dispatch with Shannon Wave Coordination

# Launch agents concurrently with wave tracking
Task("Fix Domain A", wave_id="w1", timeout=30min)
Task("Fix Domain B", wave_id="w1", timeout=30min)
Task("Fix Domain C", wave_id="w1", timeout=30min)

# Shannon wave monitors parallel execution
# MCP tracks: start_time, end_time, status per agent

4. Aggregate Results via MCP

Result structure (Serena):

parallel_dispatch:
  wave_id: "w1"
  domains_completed: 3
  time_sequential_equivalent: 90min
  time_actual_parallel: 35min
  efficiency_score: (90/35) = 2.57x faster

  per_domain:
    - domain: "Tool approval"
      agent_success_score: 0.95  # 2/3 fixed, 1 minor issue
      root_causes_found: 2
      files_modified: 3

    - domain: "Batch completion"
      agent_success_score: 1.00  # 2/2 fixed perfectly
      root_causes_found: 1
      files_modified: 2

    - domain: "Abort functionality"
      agent_success_score: 0.85  # 1/3 fixed, 1 partial
      root_causes_found: 1
      files_modified: 4

5. Review & Integrate

After agents return:

  • Read each domain summary
  • Verify agent_success_score > 0.80 per domain
  • Check for code conflicts (MCP tracks file modifications)
  • Run full test suite on integrated changes
  • Calculate overall efficiency_score

Agent Prompt Structure

**Domain:** Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts failures
**Scope:** Only this file and its immediate dependencies
**Success Metric:** Fix all 3 failing tests

Failing tests:
1. "should abort tool with partial output" → expects 'interrupted'
2. "should handle mixed completed/aborted" → timing issue
3. "should properly track pendingToolCount" → gets 0, expects 3

Your task:
1. Identify root causes
2. Fix with minimal code changes
3. Verify all 3 tests pass

Return: Summary of root causes, changes made, final test results

Success Scoring Methodology

Per-domain score:

agent_success_score = (
  (problems_fixed / problems_identified) * 0.6 +
  (test_pass_rate) * 0.3 +
  (1.0 if no_conflicts else 0.0) * 0.1
)
Range: 0.00-1.00

Overall parallel efficiency:

efficiency_score = sequential_time_cost / actual_parallel_time
Range: 1.0x (no benefit) to Nx (benefit)

Verification Checklist

  • Identified 3+ independent domains
  • Dispatched agents concurrently (wave_id tracked)
  • All per_domain agent_success_score > 0.80
  • MCP detected no file conflicts
  • Full test suite green
  • efficiency_score > 1.5x (time benefit)
  • Integrated all changes

Common Mistakes

❌ Too broad scope (fix everything) ✅ Specific scope (one test file)

❌ No domain metrics ✅ Track agent_success_score per domain

❌ Skip conflict detection ✅ MCP checks file modifications across agents

❌ Sequential dispatch (defeats purpose) ✅ Launch all agents concurrently with wave_id

Pattern Learning (Serena)

Track across sessions:

  • Domain types that parallelize well
  • Average efficiency_score per domain type
  • Typical agent_success_score distributions
  • Common conflict patterns

Use historical data to:

  • Predict which domains need more time
  • Pre-estimate efficiency gains
  • Alert if efficiency_score < 1.5x (may need sequential instead)

Integration

With: testing-skills-with-subagents (each agent tests independently) MCP: Tracks file modifications, test results, timing Serena: Metrics for pattern learning

Real-World Impact

From debugging session (2025):

  • 6 failures across 3 domains
  • Parallel dispatch: 3 agents concurrent
  • efficiency_score: 2.1x (30min parallel vs 60min sequential)
  • Overall per_domain agent_success_score: 0.93