Orchestration Patterns

Multi-Agent
Workflows.

Four orchestration patterns that route your prompt through multiple AI agents. Each applies a different reasoning structure - sequential refinement, adversarial critique, parallel decomposition, or independent consensus.

4Patterns
2Parallel
2Sequential
5Models
Workflow Pattern — 01
Pattern 01 / 04
Sequential

Sequential
Refinement

Passes output through a series of specialised agents, each refining and improving upon the previous agent's work. Intentionally sequential — each agent requires the prior output to proceed. Based on pipeline architecture patterns in computer science.

CS Theory Foundation
Sequential and pipeline processing models, waterfall development methodology, functional composition
Sequential Refinement
Each model refines the previous output
READYSTEP 0/3
Workflow Pattern — 02
Pattern 02 / 04
Sequential

Creator
& Critic

Employs a two-stage approach where one agent generates content and others provide critical feedback to identify weaknesses, inconsistencies, and areas for improvement. Sequential by design — the critic requires the creator's output to exist first. Based on adversarial models and red team/blue team security techniques.

CS Theory Foundation
Adversarial models, red team/blue team techniques, iterative design patterns
Creator – Critic
Generate → dual critic feedback → refine
READYITER 0
Workflow Pattern — 03
Pattern 03 / 04
Parallel

Divide
& Conquer

Breaks complex problems into smaller, more manageable sub-problems that are solved independently and in parallel before being recombined into a comprehensive solution. True parallelism — workers execute concurrently via ThreadPoolExecutor, not sequentially. Based on recursive algorithms and the MapReduce paradigm.

CS Theory Foundation
Recursive algorithms, MapReduce paradigm, parallel computing, decomposition techniques
Divide & Conquer
Chunk task → distribute → parallel process → merge
READYPHASE: IDLE
Workflow Pattern — 04
Pattern 04 / 04
Parallel

Majority
Vote

Multiple agents independently evaluate options or generate answers, with the final output determined by consensus or weighted agreement mechanisms. True parallelism — agents respond concurrently with no dependency on each other's outputs. Based on ensemble methods and Byzantine fault tolerance.

CS Theory Foundation
Ensemble methods, Byzantine fault tolerance, voting algorithms, consensus protocols
Majority Voting
Independent agents vote on best output
READYVOTES: 0/3
Pattern Guide — 05
01

Sequential Patterns

Sequential Refinement and Creator & Critic are intentionally sequential — each stage depends on the prior output. This is correct by design, not a limitation. Data dependencies make parallelism impossible without sacrificing the core value of iterative improvement.

02

Parallel Patterns

Divide & Conquer and Majority Vote use genuine parallelism via ThreadPoolExecutor. Workers and agents execute concurrently — real simultaneous processing, not simulated. Completion time is bounded by the slowest agent, not the sum of all agents.

03

Choosing a Pattern

Use Sequential Refinement or Creator & Critic when output quality compounds through iteration. Use Divide & Conquer when the problem decomposes cleanly into independent sub-tasks. Use Majority Vote when you want independent perspectives and consensus without synthesis.

Ready to run your first
workflow and see what
ensemble AI produces?

Book a Demo Launch App