Aglet

Prioritize Multi-Agent Coordination Cases

Coordination testing should focus on paths where one agent’s mistake propagates or disappears inside a combined answer. Prioritize shared state, cross-agent dependencies, and conflicting findings over harmless message style. Keep routine parallel success as a control for fair comparison.

Decide where the work belongs

  1. Rank coordination consequence

    Describe what wrong ownership, stale state, duplicate action, or missing handoff could change. Give weight to externally visible state, hard-to-reverse work, and failures the final synthesis could hide from reviewers.

  2. Compare path difficulty

    Review serial, parallel, dependent, conflict, delayed, failed, and recovery paths. Identify which cases distinguish coordination breakdown from a weak individual agent. Prefer paths with observable messages and state boundaries in review.

  3. Choose a coordination queue

    Select case, role contract, required messages, state evidence, owner, and review date. Defer low-risk wording variations with a trigger. If shared state is unobservable, prioritize instrumentation before expanding team scenarios.

What to carry forward

The priority output is a coordination queue tied to propagation risk, dependency complexity, recovery cost, and observability. Start where one hidden handoff could change the outcome. Keep individual-agent quality separate from team coordination. Record the missing message or state owner before accepting a combined result for release review with state evidence.

Technical background: Agent evaluation research on arXiv.

Keep the decision with the work.

Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.

Create an account See the product workflow