writing-agent-relay-workflows

name

writing-agent-relay-workflows

description

Use when building multi-agent workflows with @relayflows/core. Covers conversation vs pipeline coordination, WorkflowBuilder/DAG steps, agents, {{steps.X.output}} chaining, repairable verification gates, evidence-based completion, mandatory Claude-then-Codex fresh-eyes review/fix loops with test hardening, channels, chat-native recipes, error handling, event listeners, step sizing, lead+workers teams, and parallel waves.

Overview

The @relayflows/core workflow system orchestrates multiple AI agents (Claude, Codex, Gemini, Aider, Goose) through typed DAG-based workflows. Workflows can be written in TypeScript (preferred), Python, or YAML.

Language preference: TypeScript > Python > YAML. Use TypeScript unless the project is Python-only or a simple config-driven workflow suits YAML.

Pattern selection: Do not default to dag blindly. If the job needs a different swarm/workflow type, consult the choosing-swarm-patterns skill when available and select the pattern that best matches the coordination problem.

When to Use

• Building multi-agent workflows with step dependencies
• Orchestrating different AI CLIs (claude, codex, gemini, aider, goose)
• Creating DAG, pipeline, fan-out, or other swarm patterns
• Needing verification gates, retries, or step output chaining
• Designing product-contract workflows where failing checks should route to agents for repair instead of stopping the run
• Dynamic channel management: agents joining/leaving/muting channels mid-workflow

Non-Negotiable Workflow Checklist

Every generated workflow should satisfy this checklist before it is considered complete:

1. Start with a deterministic, resumable preflight for repository state, credentials, and declared write scope.
2. Pick the coordination shape deliberately: Conversation for non-trivial coordination, Pipeline only for linear one-shot handoffs.
3. Use repairable validation gates: capture red output with failOnError: false, hand it to a repair owner, then rerun the same check.
4. Run the mandatory fresh-eyes loops in order: Claude review/fix/final review/final fix, then Codex review/fix/final review/final fix.
5. Require review fixers to add or update appropriate tests, fixtures, assertions, or deterministic proofs for testable findings.
6. Run final deterministic acceptance after the Codex loop and before commit, PR creation, or handoff.
7. If a real blocker remains, write BLOCKED_NO_COMMIT with exact evidence and skip commit/PR creation instead of crashing the workflow.
8. If the workflow owns shipping, model branch, commit, push, PR creation, and PR URL verification as explicit deterministic steps.

Default Principle: Workflows Repair Before They Fail

• Run deterministic checks as evidence-capturing gates with captureOutput: true.
• Prefer failOnError: false for intermediate validation gates so the workflow can pass the output to a repair agent.
• Add a repair step immediately after each red-prone gate. The repair agent reads {{steps.<gate>.output}}, fixes source/tests/config, reruns the same command locally, and exits only after the gate is green or the blocker is external.
• Keep final acceptance deterministic, but still put an agent repair step before commit/PR creation. If the repair budget is exhausted or a true external blocker remains, write a blocked artifact and skip commit/PR creation; do not let the workflow end as FAILED.
• Use .reliable() or .repairable() on SDK versions that support it, especially for product-contract workflows. As of AgentWorkforce/relay#827, retry-mode workflows with agents are repair-aware by default, repair agents run before retrying malformed/failed agent steps, and the SDK covers DAG, pipeline, fan-out, worktree-backed, deterministic-only, and agent-plus-gate shapes.

Mandatory Fresh-Eyes Review Loops

Every workflow must include two comprehensive fresh-eyes review/fix loops before final acceptance, commit, PR creation, or handoff: first Claude, then Codex. This applies even to small workflows and even when deterministic tests pass. Tests prove commands passed; the fresh-eyes loops make independent agents read the actual resulting files and artifacts as if they did not author them.

verdict: FINDINGS | NO_ISSUES_FOUND | BLOCKED
finding_id: short stable id
severity: blocker | high | medium | low
file: path/to/file
issue: what is wrong
fix_required: concrete change needed
test_required: test, fixture, assertion, or proof command needed
status: open | fixed | wontfix | blocked
evidence: commands run, file paths, or blocker details

Choose Your Coordination Style — Conversation vs Pipeline

Before writing the workflow, decide how the agents will coordinate. The relay primitive supports two very different shapes, and picking the wrong one wastes the most valuable thing the SDK gives you.

Shape	What it is	Use when
Conversation (chat-native)	Interactive agents share a channel; messages, @-mentions, and ambient awareness drive coordination. Lead and workers spawn in parallel and self-organize. The relay is the coordination layer, not just transport.	Multi-file work, peer review loops, cross-agent feedback, dynamic re-planning, multi-PR coordination, anything with a human-in-the-loop escape, swarms where workers pick up each other's output.
Pipeline (one-shot DAG)	Each step runs as a one-shot subprocess (claude -p, codex exec); steps hand off via {{steps.X.output}} text injection. No agents are alive at the same time; no chat happens.	Linear, well-specified transformations; deterministic data passing; no live agent-to-agent coordination during implementation. The mandatory final Claude-then-Codex review/fix loops still apply.

Default to Conversation for any non-trivial work. Pipeline DAGs are simpler to reason about but they do not exercise the relay primitive — they are a Unix pipe with extra steps. If you would happily write the same task as a single shell pipeline, pipeline-shape is fine. Otherwise, you almost certainly want a Conversation shape.

The two shapes can mix within one workflow: pipeline-style deterministic preflight → conversation in the middle → pipeline-style commit-and-PR at the end. See Quick Reference (Conversation) below and Common Patterns → Interactive Team for the canonical recipe.

A blunt rule of thumb: if your workflow only uses agent steps with preset: 'worker' chained by {{steps.X.output}}, you are not using the relay — you are using claude -p | codex exec. That may still be the right answer; just make it a deliberate choice.

Quick Reference (Pipeline shape)

> Use this when steps are linear, well-specified, and need no agent-to-agent feedback. For anything with iteration, review, or coordination, jump to Quick Reference (Conversation shape) below.

import { workflow } from '@relayflows/core';

async function runWorkflow() {
  const result = await workflow('my-workflow')
    .description('What this workflow does')
    .pattern('dag') // or 'pipeline', 'fan-out', etc.
    .channel('wf-my-workflow') // dedicated channel (auto-generated if omitted)
    .maxConcurrency(3)
    .timeout(3_600_000) // global timeout (ms)
    .repairable()

    .agent('lead', { cli: 'claude', role: 'Architect', retries: 2 })
    .agent('worker', { cli: 'codex', role: 'Implementer', retries: 2 })
    .agent('claude-reviewer', {
      cli: 'claude',
      role: 'First-pass fresh-eyes reviewer',
      retries: 1,
      preset: 'reviewer',
    })
    .(, { : , : , :  })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
    })
    .(, { : , : , :  })

    .(, {
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : ,
      : { : , :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : ,
      : [],
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
    })

    .(, { : , :  })
    .({ : process.() });

  .(, result.);
}

().( {
  .(error);
  process.();
});

Quick Reference (Conversation shape)

> Use this for any non-trivial work — peer review, multi-file edits, cross-agent feedback, dynamic re-planning. Lead and workers spawn in parallel on a shared channel and self-organize via messages. The relay primitive does the coordinating; verification gates downstream of the lead close the workflow.

import { workflow } from '@relayflows/core';
import { ClaudeModels, CodexModels } from '@agent-relay/config';

async function runWorkflow() {
  const result = await workflow('my-workflow')
    .description('Multi-file change with peer review')
    .pattern('dag')
    .channel('wf-my-feature') // dedicated channel — agents share it
    .maxConcurrency(4)
    .timeout(3_600_000)
    .repairable()

    // Interactive agents — no preset, they live on the channel
    .agent('lead', {
      cli: 'claude',
      model: ClaudeModels.OPUS,
      role: 'Architect + reviewer. Plans, assigns, reviews, posts feedback.',
      retries: 1,
    })
    .agent('impl-a', {
      cli: 'codex',
      model: CodexModels.GPT_5_4,
      role: 'Implementer. Listens on channel for assignments and feedback.',
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : .,
      : ,
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : .,
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : .,
      : ,
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : .,
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : .,
      : ,
      : ,
    })

    
    .(, {
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : ,
    })

    
    
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [], 
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [], 
      : ,
    })

    
    
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : ,
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      :
        ,
      : ,
      : ,
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { :  },
    })
    .(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      :
        ,
      : ,
      : ,
    })

    .(, { : , :  })
    .({ : process.() });

  .(, result.);
}

().( {
  .(error);
  process.();
});

Default For Serious Implementation: Shadowed Squad Review Loop

• implementer: owns a tight file/subsystem scope and writes the change
• shadow reviewer: follows the implementer in real time, checks drift against the spec, and leaves feedback early
• optional validation owner: owns tests, dry-run proof, or fixture coverage when that is a separate deliverable
• Deterministically read the spec, AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md, workflow standards, recent local docs, and declared file targets.
• Lead splits work into bounded squads with non-overlapping ownership.
• Squads run in parallel. The shadow reads actual files and channel updates, then posts feedback while the implementer is still active.
• Each implementer writes a self-reflection artifact before external review. It must answer: what changed, what spec items are satisfied, what tests/proofs ran, what risks remain, and how the work follows repo rules.
• A fresh self-review agent reads the post-implementation files, recent local conventions, AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md, and related rules. It should not rely on the implementer's summary.
• The implementer gets that feedback and performs a repair pass.
• Deterministic gates run with captured output. Red output goes to a repair owner, then the same gate reruns.
• Run the mandatory fresh-eyes review loops in sequence: Claude reviews the actual final diff and artifacts, a fixer repairs findings and hardens them with appropriate tests/proofs, Claude reviews the post-fix state again, then Codex repeats the same cycle from scratch over the post-Claude-fix state.
• Optional extra reviewers can be added for high-stakes work, but they do not replace the sequential Claude-then-Codex loops.
• Final signoff only happens after post-Codex-fix review and final deterministic gates prove the spec is complete, or a blocker artifact explains why it cannot be completed.
• Critical TypeScript rules:
• Check the project's package.json for "type": "module" — if ESM, use import; if CJS, use require(). In both cases, wrap execution in an async function instead of raw top-level await.
• agent-relay node workflow run <file.ts> executes the file as a standalone subprocess — it does NOT inspect exports. The file MUST call .run().
• Use .run({ cwd: process.cwd() }) — createWorkflowRenderer does not exist
• For dry-run validation, call .run({ dryRun: true, cwd: process.cwd() }) or runWorkflow(path, { dryRun: true }) from TypeScript. Use agent-relay node workflow run <file> for execution.

⚡ Parallelism — Design for Speed

Cross-Workflow Parallelism: Wave Planning

# BAD — sequential (14 hours for 27 workflows at ~30 min each)
agent-relay node workflow run workflows/34-sst-wiring.ts
agent-relay node workflow run workflows/35-env-config.ts
agent-relay node workflow run workflows/36-loading-states.ts
# ... one at a time

# GOOD — parallel waves (3-4 hours for 27 workflows)
# Wave 1: independent infra (parallel)
agent-relay node workflow run workflows/34-sst-wiring.ts &
agent-relay node workflow run workflows/35-env-config.ts &
agent-relay node workflow run workflows/36-loading-states.ts &
agent-relay node workflow run workflows/37-responsive.ts &
wait
git add -A && git commit -m "Wave 1"

# Wave 2: testing (parallel — independent test suites)
agent-relay node workflow run workflows/40-unit-tests.ts &
agent-relay node workflow run workflows/41-integration-tests.ts &
agent-relay node workflow run workflows/42-e2e-tests.ts &
wait
git add -A && git commit -m "Wave 2"

Declare File Scope for Planning

workflow('48-comparison-mode')
  .packages(['web', 'core']) // monorepo packages touched
  .isolatedFrom(['49-feedback-system']) // explicitly safe to parallelize
  .requiresBefore(['46-admin-dashboard']); // explicit ordering constraint

Within-Workflow Parallelism

// BAD — unnecessary sequential chain
.step('fix-component-a', { agent: 'worker', dependsOn: ['review'] })
.step('fix-component-b', { agent: 'worker', dependsOn: ['fix-component-a'] })  // why wait?

// GOOD — parallel fan-out, merge at the end
.step('fix-component-a', { agent: 'impl-1', dependsOn: ['review'] })
.step('fix-component-b', { agent: 'impl-2', dependsOn: ['review'] })  // same dep = parallel
.step('verify-all', { agent: 'reviewer', dependsOn: ['fix-component-a', 'fix-component-b'] })

Failure Prevention

1. Do not use raw top-level await

async function runWorkflow() {
  const result = await workflow('my-workflow')
    // ...
    .run({ cwd: process.cwd() });

  console.log('Workflow status:', result.status);
}

runWorkflow().catch((error) => {
  console.error(error);
  process.exit(1);
});

2b. Standard preflight template for resumable workflows

.step('preflight', {
  type: 'deterministic',
  command: [
    'set -e',
    'BRANCH=$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)',
    'echo "branch: $BRANCH"',
    'if [ "$BRANCH" != "fix/your-branch-name" ]; then echo "ERROR: wrong branch"; exit 1; fi',
    // Files the workflow is allowed to find dirty on entry:
    //   - package-lock.json: npm install is idempotent and often touches it
    //   - every file the workflow's edit steps will rewrite: a prior partial
    //     run may have left them dirty, and the edit step will rewrite
    //     them cleanly before commit
    // Everything else is unexpected drift and must fail preflight.
    'ALLOWED_DIRTY="package-lock.json|path/to/file1\\\\.ts|path/to/file2\\\\.ts"',
    'DIRTY=$(git diff --name-only | grep -vE "^(${ALLOWED_DIRTY})$" || true)',
    'if [ -n "$DIRTY" ]; then echo "ERROR: unexpected tracked drift:"; echo "$DIRTY"; exit 1; fi',
    'if ! git diff --cached --quiet; then echo "ERROR: staging area is dirty"; git diff --cached --stat; exit 1; fi',
    'gh auth status >/dev/null 2>&1 || (echo "ERROR: gh CLI not authenticated"; exit 1)',
    'echo PREFLIGHT_OK',
  ].join(' && '),
  captureOutput: true,
  failOnError: true,
}),

2c. Picking the right .join() for multi-line shell commands

command: [
  'set -e',
  'HITS=$(grep -c diag src/cli/commands/setup.ts || true)',
  'if [ "$HITS" -lt 6 ]; then echo "FAIL"; exit 1; fi',
  'echo OK',
].join(' && '),

3. Keep final verification boring and deterministic

grep -Eq "foo|bar|baz" file.ts

6. Be explicit about shell requirements

/opt/homebrew/bin/bash workflows/your-workflow/execute.sh --wave 2

9. Factor repo-specific setup into a shared helper

// workflows/lib/cloud-repo-setup.ts
export interface CloudRepoSetupOptions {
  branch: string;
  committerName?: string;
  extraSetupCommands?: string[];
  skipWorkspaceBuild?: boolean;
}

export function applyCloudRepoSetup<T>(wf: T, opts: CloudRepoSetupOptions): T {
  // adds two steps: setup-branch, install-deps
  // install-deps runs: npm install + workspace prebuilds (build:platform, build:core, etc.)
  // ...
}

End-to-End Bug Fix Workflows

• Capture the original failure
• Reproduce the bug first in a deterministic or evidence-capturing step
• Save exact commands, logs, status codes, or screenshots/artifacts
• State the acceptance contract
• Define the exact end-to-end success criteria before implementation
• Include the real entrypoint a user would run
• Implement the fix
• Rebuild / reinstall from scratch
• Do not trust dirty local state
• Prefer a clean environment when install/bootstrap behavior is involved
• Run targeted regression checks
• Unit/integration tests are helpful but not sufficient by themselves
• Run a full end-to-end validation
• Use the real CLI / API / install path
• Prefer a clean environment (Docker, sandbox, cloud workspace, Daytona, etc.) for install/runtime issues
• Compare before vs after evidence
• Show that the original failure no longer occurs
• Record residual risks
• Call out what was not covered
• Ship the result as a PR
• Open the pull request from the workflow itself with deterministic git/GitHub steps
• See Shipping the Result - Open a PR below
• A workflow that fixes a bug and stops short of the PR has only done half the loop
• disposable sandbox / cloud workspace
• Docker / containerized environment
• fresh local shell with isolated paths
• compares candidate validation environments
• defines the acceptance contract
• chooses the best swarm pattern
• then authors the final fix/validation workflow

Shipping the Result - Open a PR

The minimal "open a PR" recipe

Current @relayflows/core does not provide createGitHubStep. Model shipping as deterministic workflow steps. Locally, use git plus gh after a preflight that proves gh auth status works. When a runtime adapter is required, write a small deterministic script that imports GitHubClient from @relayflows/github-primitive and calls createBranch, createFile or updateFile, and createPR.

import { workflow } from '@relayflows/core';

const BRANCH = `agent-relay/run-${Date.now()}`;

async function runWorkflow() {
  await workflow('feature-x')
    // ... your real implementation, repair, review loops, and final acceptance ...
    .step('write-marker', {
      type: 'deterministic',
      command: `echo "fix landed at $(date -u)" >> CHANGELOG.md`,
    })

    .step('create-branch', {
      type: 'deterministic',
      dependsOn: ['write-marker'],
      command: `git switch -c ${BRANCH}`,
    })
    .step('commit-change', {
      type: 'deterministic',
      dependsOn: ['create-branch'],
      command: 'git add CHANGELOG.md && git commit -m "chore: changelog entry"',
    })
    .step('push-branch', {
      type: 'deterministic',
      dependsOn: ['commit-change'],
      command: `git push -u origin ${BRANCH}`,
    })
    .step(, {
      : ,
      : [],
      : ,
      : { : , :  },
    })

    .({ : process.() });
}

().( {
  .(error);
  process.();
});

Key Concepts

Verification Gates

verification: { type: 'exit_code' }                        // preferred for code-editing steps
verification: { type: 'output_contains', value: 'DONE' }   // optional accelerator
verification: { type: 'file_exists', value: 'src/out.ts' } // deterministic file check
verification: { type: 'pr_url', value: 'owner/repo' }      // step must leave behind a PR

DAG Dependencies

.step('fix-types',  { agent: 'worker', dependsOn: ['review'], ... })
.step('fix-tests',  { agent: 'worker', dependsOn: ['review'], ... })
.step('final',      { agent: 'lead',   dependsOn: ['fix-types', 'fix-tests'], ... })

SDK API

// Subscribe an agent to additional channels post-spawn
relay.subscribe({ agent: 'security-auditor', channels: ['review-pr-456'] });

// Unsubscribe — agent leaves the channel entirely
relay.unsubscribe({ agent: 'security-auditor', channels: ['general'] });

// Mute — agent stays subscribed (history access) but messages are NOT injected into PTY
relay.mute({ agent: 'security-auditor', channel: 'review-pr-123' });

// Unmute — resume PTY injection
relay.unmute({ agent: 'security-auditor', channel: 'review-pr-123' });

Events

relay.onChannelSubscribed = (agent, channels) => {
  /* ... */
};
relay.onChannelUnsubscribed = (agent, channels) => {
  /* ... */
};
relay.onChannelMuted = (agent, channel) => {
  /* ... */
};
relay.onChannelUnmuted = (agent, channel) => {
  /* ... */
};

Agent Definition

```typescript

.agent('name', {
  cli: 'claude' | 'codex' | 'gemini' | 'aider' | 'goose' | 'opencode' | 'droid',
  role?: string,
  preset?: 'lead' | 'worker' | 'reviewer' | 'analyst',
  retries?: number,
  model?: string,
  interactive?: boolean, // default: true
})

Model Constants

import { ClaudeModels, CodexModels, GeminiModels } from '@agent-relay/config';

.agent('planner', { cli: 'claude', model: ClaudeModels.OPUS })    // not 'opus'
.agent('worker',  { cli: 'claude', model: ClaudeModels.SONNET })  // not 'sonnet'
.agent('coder',   { cli: 'codex',  model: CodexModels.GPT_5_4 })  // not 'gpt-5.4'

Step Definition

Agent Steps

.step('name', {
  agent: string,
  task: string,                   // supports {{var}} and {{steps.NAME.output}}
  dependsOn?: string[],
  verification?: VerificationCheck,
  retries?: number,
})

Deterministic Steps (Shell Commands)

.step('verify-files', {
  type: 'deterministic',
  command: 'test -f src/auth.ts && echo "FILE_EXISTS"',
  dependsOn: ['implement'],
  captureOutput: true,
  failOnError: false,
})
.step('repair-files', {
  agent: 'worker',
  dependsOn: ['verify-files'],
  task: `If verify-files failed, create or fix the missing file and rerun the check.
Output:
{{steps.verify-files.output}}`,
  verification: { type: 'exit_code' },
})
.step('verify-files-final', {
  type: 'deterministic',
  command: 'test -f src/auth.ts && echo "FILE_EXISTS"',
  dependsOn: ['repair-files'],
  captureOutput: true,
  failOnError: true,
})

Common Patterns

Mandatory Claude-Then-Codex Review/Fix Loops

.agent('claude-reviewer', {
  cli: 'claude',
  preset: 'reviewer',
  role: 'First-pass fresh-eyes reviewer. Reads actual files, diffs, rules, and evidence from scratch.',
  retries: 1,
})
.agent('claude-fixer', {
  cli: 'claude',
  role: 'Fixer for valid Claude review findings. Adds or updates tests/proofs for each fix.',
  retries: 2,
})
.agent('codex-reviewer', {
  cli: 'codex',
  preset: 'reviewer',
  role: 'Second-pass fresh-eyes reviewer. Reviews the post-Claude-fix state from scratch.',
  retries: 1,
})
.agent('codex-fixer', {
  cli: 'codex',
  role: 'Fixer for valid Codex review findings. Adds or updates tests/proofs for each fix.',
  retries: 2,
})

.step('claude-review', {
  agent: 'claude-reviewer',
  dependsOn: ['verify-final'],
  task: `First-pass fresh-eyes review.
Read the task spec, AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md, changed files, final diff, artifacts, and verification evidence:
{{steps.verify-final.output}}

Write .workflow-artifacts/<workflow>/claude-review.md.
Use actionable findings with file paths, severity, and required fixes.
If there are no issues, write NO_ISSUES_FOUND.`,
  : { :  },
})
.(, {
  : ,
  : [],
  : ,
  : { :  },
})
.(, {
  : ,
  : [],
  : ,
  : { :  },
})
.(, {
  : ,
  : [],
  : ,
  : { :  },
})
.(, {
  : ,
  : [],
  : ,
  : ,
  : ,
})
.(, {
  : ,
  : [],
  : ,
  : { :  },
})
.(, {
  : ,
  : [],
  : ,
  : { :  },
})
.(, {
  : ,
  : [],
  : ,
  : { :  },
})
.(, {
  : ,
  : [],
  : ,
  : { :  },
})
.(, {
  : ,
  : [],
  : ,
  : ,
  : ,
})

Interactive Team (lead + workers on shared channel)

.agent('lead', {
  cli: 'claude',
  model: ClaudeModels.OPUS,
  role: 'Architect and reviewer — assigns work, reviews, posts feedback',
  retries: 1,
  // No preset — interactive by default
})

.agent('impl-new', {
  cli: 'codex',
  model: CodexModels.GPT_5_4,
  role: 'Creates new files. Listens on channel for assignments and feedback.',
  retries: 2,
  // No preset — interactive, receives channel messages
})

.agent('impl-modify', {
  cli: 'codex',
  model: CodexModels.GPT_5_4,
  role: 'Edits existing files. Listens on channel for assignments and feedback.',
  retries: 2,
})

// All three share the same dependsOn — they start concurrently (no deadlock)
.step('lead-coordinate', {
  agent: 'lead',
  dependsOn: ['context'],
  task: `You are the lead on #channel. Workers: impl-new, impl-modify.
Post the plan. Assign files. Review their work. Post feedback if needed.
Workers iterate based on your feedback. Exit when all files are correct.`,
})
.step('impl-new-work', {
  : ,
  : [],   
  : ,
})
.(, {
  : ,
  : [],   
  : ,
})

.(, { : , : [], ... })

1. Question / Answer (blocking ask)

.step('integrate', {
  agent: 'integrator',
  dependsOn: ['context'],
  task: `You are the integrator on #wf-feature.
Before writing code, post a direct question to @schema-owner asking which
table owns the new field. Do NOT proceed until @schema-owner replies in
channel. If no reply arrives in 5 minutes, @-mention the lead.`,
})

2. Broadcast / Ack

.step('lead-coordinate', {
  agent: 'lead',
  dependsOn: ['context'],
  task: `Post the plan to #wf-feature, then @impl-a @impl-b @impl-c.
Wait for each to reply with "ACK <agent-name>" before issuing assignments.
If any worker hasn't acked in 3 minutes, re-post and ping again.
Only after all three have acked, post per-worker assignments.`,
})

3. Peer Review Handoff

.step('impl-a-work', {
  agent: 'impl-a',
  dependsOn: ['context'],
  task: `Implement src/foo.ts per the lead's assignment.
When done, post to #wf-feature: "@reviewer ready: src/foo.ts" — include the
commit SHA. Then wait for @reviewer's verdict in channel.
- If "APPROVED", you're done.
- If "CHANGES_REQUESTED <notes>", apply the notes and re-post.
- If no verdict in 5 min, @-mention the lead.`,
})

4. Standup / Status Probe

.step('lead-coordinate', {
  agent: 'lead',
  task: `... coordinate the team ...

Every 10 minutes, post a status probe: "@impl-a @impl-b status?"
Each worker should reply with one of:
  - "RUNNING <step>" (still working)
  - "BLOCKED <reason>" (@-mention the lead with the blocker)
  - "DONE <artifact>" (ready for review)

If a worker is silent for two probes in a row, mark them stalled and
reassign their work to a peer.`,
})

5. Hand-Off with Context

.step('impl-a-work', {
  agent: 'impl-a',
  task: `... finish your part ...

When done, post a handoff to #wf-feature targeting the next worker:
"@impl-b HANDOFF: src/foo.ts ready. Touched: <files>. Open question: <if any>.
Tests: <pass/fail summary>. Commit: <sha>."`,
})

Pipeline (sequential handoff)

.pattern('pipeline')
.step('analyze', { agent: 'analyst', task: '...' })
.step('implement', { agent: 'dev', task: '{{steps.analyze.output}}', dependsOn: ['analyze'] })
.step('test', { agent: 'tester', task: '{{steps.implement.output}}', dependsOn: ['implement'] })

Error Handling

.onError('fail-fast')   // stop on first failure (default)
.onError('continue')    // skip failed branches, continue others
.onError('retry', { maxRetries: 3, retryDelayMs: 5000 })

Multi-File Edit Pattern

When a workflow needs to modify multiple existing files, use one agent step per file with a deterministic verify gate after each. Agents reliably edit 1-2 files per step but fail on 4+.

steps:
  - name: read-types
    type: deterministic
    command: cat src/types.ts
    captureOutput: true

  - name: edit-types
    agent: dev
    dependsOn: [read-types]
    task: |
      Edit src/types.ts. Current contents:
      {{steps.read-types.output}}
      Add 'pending' to the Status union type.
      Only edit this one file.
    verification:
      type: exit_code

  - name: verify-types
    type: deterministic
    dependsOn: [edit-types]
    command: 'if git diff --quiet src/types.ts; then echo "NOT MODIFIED"; exit 1; fi; echo "OK"'
    captureOutput: true
    failOnError: false

  - name: fix-types-verification
    agent: dev
    dependsOn: [verify-types]
    task: |
      If verify-types failed, fix src/types.ts and rerun the verify command.
      Output:
      {{steps.verify-types.output}}
    verification:
      type: exit_code

  - name: 
     
     []
     
     
     

    
     
     []
      
     

    
     
     []
         
       

    
     
     []
     
     
     

    
     
     []
         
       

    
     
     []
     
     
     

  
    
     
     []
                    
     
     

    
     
     []
         
       

    
     
     []
     
     
     

File Materialization: Verify Before Proceeding

After any step that creates files, add a deterministic file_exists check before proceeding. Non-interactive agents may exit 0 without writing anything (wrong cwd, stdout instead of disk).

- name: verify-files
  type: deterministic
  dependsOn: [impl-auth, impl-storage]
  command: |
    missing=0
    for f in src/auth/credentials.ts src/storage/client.ts; do
      if [ ! -f "$f" ]; then echo "MISSING: $f"; missing=$((missing+1)); fi
    done
    if [ $missing -gt 0 ]; then echo "$missing files missing"; exit 1; fi
    echo "All files present"
  captureOutput: true
  failOnError: false

- name: fix-missing-files
  agent: impl-auth
  dependsOn: [verify-files]
  task: |
    If verify-files found missing files, create/fix them and rerun the check.
    Output:
    {{steps.verify-files.output}}
  verification:
    type: exit_code

- name: verify-files-final
  type: deterministic
  dependsOn: [fix-missing-files]
  command: |
    missing=0
    for f in src/auth/credentials.ts src/storage/client.ts; do
      if [ ! -f "$f" ]; then echo "MISSING: $f"; missing=$((missing+1)); fi
    done
    if [ $missing -gt 0 ]; then echo "$missing files missing"; exit 1; fi
    echo "All files present"
  captureOutput: true
  failOnError: true

Edit Gates Must See Untracked Files

- name: provider-edit-gate-capture
  type: deterministic
  dependsOn: [implement-providers]
  command: |
    if [ -z "$(git status --short -- packages/new-provider .workflow-artifacts/my-flow)" ]; then
      echo "NO_PROVIDER_CHANGES"
      exit 1
    fi
    echo "PROVIDER_EDIT_GATE_OK"
  captureOutput: true
  failOnError: false

- name: repair-edit-gate
  agent: provider-worker
  dependsOn: [provider-edit-gate-capture]
  task: |
    If provider-edit-gate-capture reported NO_PROVIDER_CHANGES, inspect git
    status including untracked files and add the missing provider artifacts.
    If it already passed, do nothing.
  verification:
    type: exit_code

- name: provider-edit-gate-final
  type: deterministic
  dependsOn: [repair-edit-gate]
  command: |
    if [ -z "$(git status --short -- packages/new-provider .workflow-artifacts/my-flow)" ]; then
      echo "NO_PROVIDER_CHANGES"
      exit 1
    fi
    echo "PROVIDER_EDIT_GATE_FINAL_OK"
  captureOutput: true
  failOnError: false

- name: repair-provider-edit-gate-final
  agent: provider-worker
  dependsOn: [provider-edit-gate-final]
     
     

Agent Transport Must Not Be The First Hard Gate

Interactive lead-and-worker teams are useful, but they are still process

.step('runtime-implementation', {
  agent: 'impl-runtime',
  dependsOn: ['context'],
  task: 'Implement the runtime slice and write .workflow-artifacts/runtime.md',
})
.step('adapter-implementation', {
  agent: 'impl-adapters',
  dependsOn: ['context'],
  task: 'Implement adapter wiring and write .workflow-artifacts/adapters.md',
})
.step('implementation-reconcile', {
  type: 'deterministic',
  dependsOn: ['context'],
  command: `git status --short -- packages/core packages/*/src/writeback.ts scripts tests .workflow-artifacts
test -f scripts/verify-e2e.mjs || echo "MISSING_E2E"
test -f packages/core/src/runtime/router.ts || echo "MISSING_ROUTER"`,
  captureOutput: true,
  failOnError: false,
})
.step('repair-implementation-reconcile', {
  agent: 'qa',
  dependsOn: ['implementation-reconcile'],
  task: `Finish anything missing before gates run:\n{{steps.implementation-reconcile.output}}`,
  verification: { type: 'exit_code' },
})
.step('run-e2e', {
  type: 'deterministic',
  dependsOn: ['repair-implementation-reconcile'],
  : ,
  : ,
  : ,
})

DAG Deadlock Anti-Pattern

```yaml

# WRONG — deadlock: coordinate depends on context, work-a depends on coordinate
steps:
  - name: coordinate
    dependsOn: [context]    # lead waits for WORKER_DONE...
  - name: work-a
    dependsOn: [coordinate] # ...but work-a can't start until coordinate finishes

# RIGHT — workers and lead start in parallel
steps:
  - name: context
    type: deterministic
  - name: work-a
    dependsOn: [context]    # starts with lead
  - name: coordinate
    dependsOn: [context]    # starts with workers
  - name: merge
    dependsOn: [work-a, coordinate]

Step Sizing

One agent, one deliverable. A step's task prompt should be 10-20 lines max.

# Team pattern: lead + workers on a shared channel
steps:
  - name: track-lead-coord
    agent: track-lead
    dependsOn: [prior-step]
    task: |
      Lead the track on #my-track. Workers: track-worker-1, track-worker-2.
      Post assignments to the channel. Review worker output.

  - name: track-worker-1-impl
    agent: track-worker-1
    dependsOn: [prior-step] # same dep as lead — starts concurrently
    task: |
      Join #my-track. track-lead will post your assignment.
      Implement the file as directed.
    verification:
      type: exit_code

  - name: next-step
    dependsOn: [track-lead-coord] # downstream depends on lead, not workers

Supervisor Pattern

When you set .pattern('supervisor') (or hub-spoke, fan-out), the runner auto-assigns a supervisor agent as owner for worker steps. The supervisor monitors progress, nudges idle workers, and issues OWNER_DECISION.

Auto-hardening only activates for hub patterns — not pipeline or dag.

Use case	Pattern	Why
Sequential, no monitoring	pipeline	Simple, no overhead
Workers need oversight	supervisor	Auto-owner monitors
Local/small models	supervisor	Supervisor catches stuck workers
All non-interactive	pipeline or dag	No PTY = no supervision needed

Concurrency

Cap maxConcurrency at 4-6. Spawning 10+ agents simultaneously causes broker timeouts.

Parallel agents	maxConcurrency
2-4	4 (default safe)
5-10	5
10+	6-8 max

Common Mistakes

Mistake	Fix
Treating relay as transport, not as a coordination layer (every step is preset: 'worker', every handoff is {{steps.X.output}})	Default to Conversation shape for non-trivial work — interactive agents on a shared channel. Pipeline-shape is only correct when the work could be expressed as a bash | bash | bash pipe.
Interactive agents on a channel whose task strings don't tell them to talk to each other	Pick a Chat-Native Coordination Recipe (Q/A, Broadcast/Ack, Peer Review, Standup, Hand-Off) and bake it into the task prompt — otherwise you're paying for a chat substrate you're not using
All workflows run sequentially	Group independent workflows into parallel waves (4-7x speedup)
Every step depends on the previous one	Only add dependsOn when there's a real data dependency
Self-review step with no timeout	Set timeout: 300_000 (5 min) — Codex hangs in non-interactive review
One giant workflow per feature	Split into smaller workflows that can run in parallel waves
Adding exit instructions to tasks	Runner handles self-termination automatically
Interactive PTY Codex for one-shot artifact steps	Use preset: 'worker' plus file_exists or custom verification
Setting timeoutMs on agents/steps	Use global .timeout() only
Using general channel	Set .channel('wf-name') for isolation
{{steps.X.output}} without dependsOn: ['X']	Output won't be available yet
Requiring exact sentinel as only completion gate	Use exit_code or file_exists verification
Writing 100-line task prompts	Split into lead + workers on a channel
maxConcurrency: 16 with many parallel steps	Cap at 5-6
Non-interactive agent reading large files via tools

YAML Alternative

```yaml

version: '1.0'
name: my-workflow
swarm:
  pattern: dag
  channel: wf-my-workflow
agents:
  - name: lead
    cli: claude
    role: Architect
  - name: worker
    cli: codex
    role: Implementer
  - name: claude-reviewer
    cli: claude
    preset: reviewer
    role: First-pass fresh-eyes reviewer
  - name: claude-fixer
    cli: claude
    role: First-pass review fixer
  - name: codex-reviewer
    cli: codex
    preset: reviewer
    role: Second-pass fresh-eyes reviewer
  - name: codex-fixer
     
       

    
    
        
         
         
        
         
         
         []
        
           
        
         
         []
         
        
         
         []
         
        
         
         []
         
        
         
         []
         
        
         
         []
         
        
         
         []
         
        
         
         []
         
        
         
         []
         
        
         
         []
         
         
         

Available Swarm Patterns

dag (default), fan-out, pipeline, hub-spoke, consensus, mesh, handoff, cascade, debate, hierarchical, map-reduce, scatter-gather, supervisor, reflection, red-team, verifier, auction, escalation, saga, circuit-breaker, blackboard, swarm

See skill choosing-swarm-patterns for pattern selection guidance.