PrerequisiteAI 202 recommended, plus Modules 1 to 5 of this course
0 / 7 completed
Sync my progressJoin a session to keep progress across devices and share it with your instructor
Learning objectives
Describe six orchestration patterns: Supervisor / Worker, Planner / Executor, Specialist Team, Peer-to-Peer, Hierarchical and Hybrid
Distinguish centralized orchestration, decentralized collaboration and hybrid orchestration
Compare patterns on eight dimensions: control, flexibility, latency, communication complexity, cost, auditability, robustness and permission management
Explain cost, latency and complexity tradeoffs, including why the simplest sufficient pattern is usually best
Complete Activity 6 and produce an Orchestration Pattern Design
Orchestration patterns
9 min
Who coordinates the system?
Roles, delegation, messages and shared context are the parts. Orchestration is how the parts are arranged so that the team acts as one system. The key design question is who holds control: one coordinator, all the agents together, or a mix.
Core question
Who is responsible for coordinating the whole multi-agent system?
Three ways to place control
Style
Plain meaning
Typical strength
Centralized orchestration
One agent or role directs the others and decides what happens next
Clear control and easy to audit
Decentralized collaboration
Agents coordinate with each other directly, with no single director
Flexible and no single point of failure
Hybrid orchestration
Central control for the overall flow, bounded peer collaboration inside it
Balances control with flexibility
Info
A topology is the shape of who talks to whom. The next three slides present six patterns, A to F. Each comes with a text version of its diagram so it can be read without seeing the picture.
Key takeaway: Orchestration is a choice about where control sits: centralized, decentralized or a hybrid.
Supervisor sends tasks to Agent A, Agent B and Agent C
Each Worker returns its result to the Supervisor
Supervisor aggregates the results into one output
Info
Text version of Pattern A: one Supervisor sits at the top with three Workers below it, Agent A, Agent B and Agent C. Arrows go down from the Supervisor to each Worker, and arrows come back up from each Worker to an Aggregate step. Workers do not talk to each other; all coordination passes through the Supervisor.
Pattern B: Planner / Executor
Planner turns the goal into a Plan
Executors carry out the steps of the Plan
Executors return Results
Planner or Evaluator reviews the Results and adjusts the Plan if needed
Info
Text version of Pattern B: a Planner produces a Plan. The Plan goes down to one or more Executors. Their Results go back up to the Planner or to an Evaluator, which may send an adjusted Plan back down. It is a loop: plan, execute, review.
When each fits
Pattern
Good when
Watch out for
A: Supervisor / Worker
Work splits into independent parts that need one combined answer
The Supervisor becomes a bottleneck and a single point of failure
B: Planner / Executor
The steps are unclear at the start and need a plan and a review
A weak plan spreads through every Executor
Check yourself
In Pattern A, how do Workers usually exchange information?
Key takeaway: Supervisor / Worker centralizes control around a hub. Planner / Executor separates planning from doing and adds a review loop.
9 min
Pattern C: Specialist Team and Pattern D: Peer-to-Peer
Pattern C: Specialist Team
Research agent gathers material
Analysis agent interprets it
Verification agent checks claims and sources
Reporting agent writes the final output
Info
Text version of Pattern C: four specialists sit in a line, Research, then Analysis, then Verification, then Reporting. Work moves one way from left to right, and each specialist hands off to the next using a message contract.
Pattern D drops the central coordinator. Agents talk to each other directly and agree among themselves what to do.
Info
Text version of Pattern D: four agents, A, B, C and D, are placed in a grid. A and B are connected in both directions, and C and D are connected in both directions. A is also connected in both directions to C, and B in both directions to D. Any agent can message its neighbors, and there is no single director.
When each fits
Pattern
Good when
Watch out for
C: Specialist Team
The work is a known sequence and each stage needs a distinct skill
Rigid order, and an early error travels down the line
D: Peer-to-Peer
The problem is open ended and agents benefit from exchanging views
Message volume grows quickly, and it is harder to audit and to assign permissions
Check yourself
Which pattern has no single coordinator and lets agents message each other directly?
Key takeaway: Specialist Team is a skill-based pipeline. Peer-to-Peer is flexible but harder to control and audit.
9 min
Pattern E: Hierarchical and Pattern F: Hybrid
Pattern E: Hierarchical
Lead Agent owns the overall goal
Sub-team Leads each run a group of specialists
Specialist Agents do the detailed work
Results flow back up through the Sub-team Leads to the Lead Agent
Info
Text version of Pattern E: three levels. One Lead Agent at the top. Below it, several Sub-team Leads. Below each Sub-team Lead, a group of Specialist Agents. Instructions go down one level at a time and results come back up one level at a time. A Specialist talks to its own lead, not to the top.
Pattern F, Hybrid Orchestration, combines central control with bounded peer collaboration. A coordinator holds the overall flow, but a small group of agents may work things out directly with each other inside clear limits.
Info
Text version of Pattern F: a central coordinator at the top directs the overall flow. Inside one step, two or three agents are allowed to exchange messages directly. Their exchange has a limit, such as a maximum number of rounds, and the outcome returns to the coordinator.
When each fits
Pattern
Good when
Watch out for
E: Hierarchical
The system is large and can be split into sub-teams with their own goals
More layers add delay and dilute information passed up and down
F: Hybrid
Overall control is needed, but some steps benefit from free discussion
The bounds must be clear, or it drifts toward uncontrolled peer chatter
Warning
More agents and more layers are not better by default. Each added agent or layer adds cost, delay and more that a human must be able to review.
Check yourself
What makes a Hybrid pattern different from pure Peer-to-Peer?
Key takeaway: Hierarchical scales by layering sub-teams. Hybrid mixes central control with bounded peer collaboration.
Comparing patterns
8 min
Orchestration dimensions and tradeoffs
To choose a pattern, compare it on the same dimensions each time. No pattern wins on all eight.
Eight orchestration dimensions
Dimension
Question to ask
Control
How clearly does one place decide what happens next?
Flexibility
How well can the team adapt to surprises?
Latency
How many hops before a result is ready?
Communication complexity
How many messages and links must be designed and understood?
Cost
How many agent calls and how much effort does one task use?
Auditability
Can a human trace who decided what?
Robustness
What happens if one agent fails or is wrong?
Permission management
How easy is it to give each agent only the access it needs?
Rough tendencies (a starting point, not a rule)
Pattern
Control
Flexibility
Cost and latency
Auditability
A: Supervisor / Worker
High
Medium
Medium, hub adds hops
High
B: Planner / Executor
High
Medium
Medium to high, review loop
High
C: Specialist Team
Medium
Low
Low to medium, fixed line
High
D: Peer-to-Peer
Low
High
High, many messages
Low
E: Hierarchical
High
Medium
High, many layers
Medium
F: Hybrid
Medium to high
Medium to high
Medium to high
Medium
Info
Text version of the table: centralized patterns, A, B and E, score high on control and auditability but add hops. Peer-to-Peer, D, scores high on flexibility but low on control and auditability, and costs the most messages. Specialist Team, C, is the cheapest and simplest but the least flexible. Hybrid, F, sits in between.
Check yourself
A task has a fixed, well understood sequence of stages and a low budget. Which choice is most sensible?
Key takeaway: Compare patterns on the same eight dimensions, and choose the simplest pattern that meets the need.
Practice and deliverable
8 min
Activity 6: Choose the Orchestration Pattern
Take a simulated scenario, or the multi-agent team you designed in earlier modules, and choose one orchestration pattern for it.
1Restate the scenario Write the goal, the roles and what makes the work hard.
2Shortlist two or three patterns Pick from Supervisor / Worker, Planner / Executor, Specialist Team, Peer-to-Peer, Hierarchical and Hybrid.
3Compare on the dimensions Rate control, flexibility, latency, communication complexity, cost, auditability, robustness and permission management.
4Choose and justify Select one pattern and give reasons that cite at least three dimensions.
5Mark human checkpoints Show where a human reviews or approves, especially for high-impact steps.
Warning
Privacy reminder: use simulated or already-public scenarios. Do not enter company secrets, client personal data or unauthorized sensitive information.
Which justification for choosing a pattern is strongest?
Key takeaway: Shortlist patterns, compare on the dimensions, choose and justify, and mark where humans review.
8 min
The Orchestration Pattern Design
Turn your Activity 6 choice into a short design that another person could review.
1Name the pattern and why State the chosen pattern and the main reasons.
2Sketch the topology in words Write who talks to whom, and where control sits. Add a text description, not only a drawing.
3State the tradeoffs accepted Note the cost, latency and complexity you accept, and what you gave up.
4Add human oversight points List where a human reviews and remains responsible.
Info
Deliverable: an Orchestration Pattern Design. It contains the scenario, the shortlisted patterns, the comparison on the eight dimensions, the chosen pattern with reasons, a text description of the topology, the tradeoffs accepted and the human oversight points. Keep it for your Multi-Agent Architecture Canvas.
Continue to Module 7: Next: what happens when agents disagree, and how do humans stay in charge?
Check yourself
Why should your topology come with a text description and not only a drawing?
Key takeaway: Record the pattern, the topology in words, the tradeoffs accepted and the human oversight points in your Orchestration Pattern Design.
