dispatching-parallel-agents
Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies
By sickn33 · 523 installs
npx skills add sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills --skill dispatching-parallel-agents
Source repository · Upstream listing
Dispatching Parallel Agents
Overview
When you have multiple unrelated failures (different test files, different subsystems, different bugs), investigating them sequentially wastes time. Each investigation is independent and can happen in parallel.
Core principle: Dispatch one agent per independent problem domain. Let them work concurrently.
When to Use
Use when:
3+ test files failing with different root causes
Multiple subsystems broken independently
Each problem can be understood without context from others
No shared state between investigations
Don't use when:
Failures are related (fix one might fix others)
Need to understand full system state
Agents would interfere with each other
The Pattern
1. Identify Independent Domains
Group failures by what's broken:
File A tests: Tool approval flow
File B tests: Batch completion behavior
File C tests: Abort functionality
Each domain is independent fixing tool approval doesn't affect abort tests.
2. Create Focused Agent Tasks
Each agent gets:
Specific scope: One test file or subsystem
Clear goal: Make these tests pass
Constraints: Don't change other code
Expected output: Summary of what you found and fixed
3. Dispatch in Parallel
4. Review and Integrate
When agents return:
Read each summary
Verify fixes don't conflict
Run full test suite
Integrate all changes
Agent Prompt Structure
Good agent prompts are:
1. Focused One clear problem domain
2. Self contained All context needed to understand the problem
3. Specific about output What should the agent return?
Common Mistakes
❌ Too broad: "Fix all the tests" agent gets lost
✅ Specific: "Fix agent tool abort.test.ts" focused scope
❌ No context: "Fix the race condition" agent doesn't know where
✅ Context: Paste the error messages and test names
❌ No constraints: Agent might refactor everything
✅ Constraints: "Do NOT change production code" or "Fix tests only"
❌ Vague output: "Fix it" you don't know what changed
✅ Specific: "Return summary of root cause and changes"
When NOT to Use
Related failures: Fixing one might fix others investigate together first
Need full context: Understanding requires seeing entire system
Exploratory debugging: You don't know what's broken yet
Shared state: Agents would interfere (editing same files, using same resources)
Real Example from Session
Scenario: 6 test failures across 3 files after major refactoring
Failures:
agent tool abort.test.ts: 3 failures (timing issues)
batch completion behavior.test.ts: 2 failures (tools not executing)
tool approval race conditions.test.ts: 1 failure (execution count = 0)
Decision: Independent domains abort logic separate from batch completion separate from race conditions
Dispatch:
Results:
Agent 1: Replaced timeouts with event based waiting
Agent 2: Fixed event structure bug (threadId in wrong place)
Agent 3: Added wait for async tool execution to complete
Integration: All fixes independent, no conflicts, full suite green
Time saved: 3 problems solved in parallel vs sequentially
Key Benefits
1. Parallelization Multiple investigations happen simultaneously
2. Focus Each agent has narrow scope, less context to track
3. Independence Agents don't interfere with each other
4. Speed 3 problems solved in time of 1
Verification
After agents return:
1. Review each summary Understand what changed
2. Check for conflicts Did agents edit same code?
3. Run full suite Verify all fixes work together
4. Spot check Agents can make systematic errors
Real World Impact
From debugging session (2025 10 03):
6 failures across 3 files
3 agents dispatched in parallel
All investigations completed concurrently
All fixes integrated successfully
Zero conflicts between agent changes
Limitations
Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment specific validation, testing, or expert review.
Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.