Multi-Agent Systems
Orchestrating teams of specialized LLM agents to collaborate, review, and solve complex end-to-end tasks.
Multi-Agent Topologies
1. SEQUENTIAL PIPELINE 2. HIERARCHICAL SUPERVISOR 3. PEER-TO-PEER NETWORK
[Researcher] ──► [Coder] ──► [QA] [ MANAGER AGENT ] [Agent A] ◄──► [Agent B]
/ │ \ ▲ ▲
▼ ▼ ▼ │ │
[Search] [Coder] [QA] [Agent C] ◄──► [Agent D]
- Sequential Pipeline: Outputs of Agent A feed directly into Agent B (e.g. Research $\to$ Write $\to$ Translate).
- Hierarchical Supervisor: Central Manager agent delegates sub-tasks, collects results, and routes next steps (LangGraph pattern).
- Peer-to-Peer Network: Agents communicate dynamically over a shared message bus (AutoGen pattern).
Role Specialization Pattern
Instead of one giant prompt: "Write, test, and document a Python web scraper":
# Defined via CrewAI / AutoGen
researcher = Agent(role="Web Researcher", tools=[search_tool], goal="Gather API endpoints")
coder = Agent(role="Python Engineer", tools=[code_executor], goal="Write clean scraper")
reviewer = Agent(role="Security Auditor", tools=[], goal="Audit code for security flaws")
# Execution flow: Researcher -> Coder -> Reviewer -> Coder (Fixes) -> Final Output
State Management & Shared Memory
Agents communicate by appending messages to a shared State Graph:
$$\text{State}_{t+1} = \text{State}_t \cup { \text{Agent_Name}: \text{Output} }$$
In frameworks like LangGraph, state transitions are modeled as a State Diagram (DAG) with conditional routing edges:
[Start] ──► [Coder Agent] ──► [Test Evaluator] ──(Pass)──► [End]
│
(Fail)
▼
[Debugger Agent] ──► [Coder Agent]
Say this out loud
"Multi-agent systems decompose complex tasks across specialized LLM roles (Researcher, Coder, Reviewer). Orchestration topologies range from Sequential Pipelines to Hierarchical Supervisors that route sub-tasks dynamically. Frameworks like LangGraph use state graphs with conditional edges to manage multi-agent loops, requiring strict iteration bounds to prevent infinite echo loops."
Follow-ups to expect
- What is Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) in Multi-Agent workflows? Interrupting the agent state graph before executing critical nodes (e.g. sending emails or deploying code), prompting human operators to approve, edit, or reject the proposed action.
- How do you prevent context window overflow in long multi-agent sessions? Apply Agent State Summarization: periodically condense historical agent chat turns into a high-level summary string, dropping raw intermediate tool outputs.
Check yourself
Why does decomposing a complex software engineering task into multiple specialized LLM agents (e.g. Architect, Coder, QA Tester) outperform a single monolithic LLM prompt?