| name | dispatching-parallel-agents |
| description | Use when facing 2+ independent failures or tasks that can be worked on concurrently without shared state. Groups independent failures by component (frontend/backend/database), launches concurrent agents, integrates results, then runs full test suite. Triggers on multiple independent test failures, multi-component CI failures, or parallel feature work. |
| license | MIT |
| metadata | {"author":"NodeJS-Starter-V1 — adapted from obra/superpowers (MIT)","version":"1.0.0","locale":"en-AU"} |
Dispatching Parallel Agents
Adapted from obra/superpowers — MIT. Adapted for the NodeJS-Starter-V1 monorepo (frontend/backend/database component separation).
Overview
When you have multiple unrelated failures across different components or files, investigating them sequentially wastes time. Each independent investigation can happen in parallel.
Core principle: Dispatch one agent per independent problem domain. Let them work concurrently. Integrate results after all complete.
When to Use
Use when:
- 3+ test files failing with different root causes
- Multiple independent subsystems broken (e.g., React component + FastAPI endpoint + DB model)
- Each problem can be understood without context from the others
- No shared state between investigations (agents won't edit the same files)
Don't use when:
- Failures are related (fixing one might fix others — investigate together first)
- Exploratory debugging (you don't know what's broken yet)
- Agents would edit the same files (shared state conflict)
- All failures clearly stem from a single root cause
The Pattern
Step 1: Identify Independent Domains
Group failures by component. In NodeJS-Starter-V1:
| Domain | Scope | Typical Failures |
|---|
| Frontend | apps/web/ | React component tests, vitest failures, TypeScript errors |
| Backend | apps/backend/ | FastAPI route tests, Pydantic validation, pytest failures |
| Database | scripts/, alembic/ | Migration errors, schema mismatches, pgvector issues |
| E2E | apps/web/e2e/ | Playwright test failures, user flow regressions |
| CI/CD | .github/workflows/ | Pipeline failures, environment issues |
Each domain is independent — fixing a React component doesn't affect pytest failures.
Step 2: Create Focused Agent Prompts
Each agent gets:
- Specific scope: One test file, one component, or one subsystem
- Clear goal: Make these specific tests pass
- Constraints: Do NOT change code outside this scope
- Expected output: Summary of root cause and changes made
Good agent prompt template:
Fix the N failing tests in <test-file-path>:
1. "<test name>" — <error description>
2. "<test name>" — <error description>
Your task:
1. Read the test file and understand what each test verifies
2. Identify root cause — use systematic-debugging skill (Phase 1 first)
3. Write a failing regression test for each issue (TDD skill)
4. Fix the root cause, not the symptom
5. Verify all N tests pass: <test command>
6. Ensure no other tests regressed
Do NOT change code outside <scope-path>.
Return: Summary of root cause and what you changed.
Step 3: Dispatch in Parallel
In Claude Code, use the Task tool to dispatch concurrent agents:
Task("Fix apps/web/__tests__/components/auth-form.test.tsx failures — 3 failing tests [TDD + systematic-debugging]")
Task("Fix apps/backend/tests/api/test_contractors.py failures — 2 failing tests [TDD + systematic-debugging]")
Task("Fix apps/backend/tests/unit/test_models.py failures — 1 failing test [TDD + systematic-debugging]")
# All three run concurrently
Step 4: Review and Integrate
When all agents return:
- Read each summary — understand what changed and why
- Check for conflicts — did any agents edit the same files?
- Run full test suite — verify all fixes work together
pnpm turbo run test
pnpm turbo run type-check
pnpm turbo run lint
- Spot check — agents can make systematic errors; review critical changes manually
Real-World Example
Scenario: CI fails after a backend refactor. 5 test failures across 3 files.
Failures:
apps/web/__tests__/components/contractor-card.test.tsx: 2 failures (missing prop types after API change)apps/backend/tests/api/test_contractors.py: 2 failures (422 on new required field)apps/backend/tests/unit/test_validators.py: 1 failure (ABN validator edge case)
Decision: Independent domains — React component props separate from FastAPI validation separate from validator logic.
Dispatch:
Agent 1 → Fix contractor-card.test.tsx (frontend scope only)
Agent 2 → Fix test_contractors.py (backend API scope only)
Agent 3 → Fix test_validators.py (unit validator scope only)
Results:
- Agent 1: Updated TypeScript interface to include new
abn field from API
- Agent 2: Added default value for new
availability_status field in test data
- Agent 3: Fixed edge case: ABN with leading zeros was being trimmed
Integration: All fixes independent. No conflicts. Full suite green.
Time saved: 3 investigations in parallel vs. 3 sequential investigations.
Common Mistakes
| ❌ Wrong | ✅ Right |
|---|
| "Fix all the tests" (too broad) | "Fix the 3 failing tests in auth-form.test.tsx" |
| No context (agent is lost) | Paste the exact error messages and test names |
| No constraints (agent refactors everything) | "Do NOT change code outside apps/web/components/" |
| Vague output ("Fix it") | "Return: root cause summary and list of files changed" |
| Dispatch related failures to separate agents | Investigate related failures together first |
Verification After Integration
After all agents complete and you've integrated:
pnpm turbo run test
pnpm turbo run type-check
pnpm turbo run lint
Use the verification-before-completion skill before claiming "Done" — run the commands, read the output.
Key Benefits
- Parallelisation — Multiple investigations happen simultaneously
- Focus — Each agent has narrow scope, less context noise
- Independence — Agents don't interfere with each other
- Speed — N problems solved in time of 1
Integration with Existing Infrastructure
/minion command — Minion currently dispatches serially. This skill provides the formal pattern for concurrent dispatch when multiple independent failures are detected.systematic-debugging skill — Each agent should apply systematic-debugging within its scope (4-phase protocol, 3-attempt circuit breaker).tdd skill — Each agent writes failing tests first, then fixes.verification-before-completion skill — Final integration check before claiming all done.
