编排拓扑Orchestration Topologies: One Center or None?

Four sub-agents, each wired directly to each other. Search and analysis researched the same sources twice, writing received two conclusions that contradicted each other, and when the report turned out wrong, the messages were scattered across six channels and nobody could reconstruct a thing. (Illustrative example.)

What this lesson covers

• The three questions that fix any topology's character: is there a center, how many paths are there, who owns the errors, with the channel arithmetic (four nodes, six channels; ten nodes, forty-five)
• Orchestrator and sub-agents: the coordinator that decomposes, delegates, and aggregates, its three field points, and why the pattern stands or falls with the coordinator's split
• Hub-and-spoke by the official definition in task statement 1.2, and the three failures that all grow out of the center: bottleneck, single point of failure, overload
• The pipeline (prompt chaining) with the guide's two-station code review, and peer-to-peer with its narrow legitimate ground
• The selection order for real projects, the one-center floor under every hybrid, and the five traps, starting with wiring everyone to everyone

Chapters

• 00:00 Where this lesson sits: Domain 1, Gate 3 Orchestration
• 00:11 Opening incident: four agents, six channels, one tangle
• 01:05 Inside the delegated segments
• 01:37 Three questions that fix a topology
• 02:28 Shape one: orchestrator and sub-agents
• 03:56 Shape two: hub-and-spoke, by the official definition
• 05:52 Shape three: the pipeline
• 06:59 Shape four: peer-to-peer
• 08:03 The four names side by side
• 09:21 Choosing, in order
• 10:20 Five traps
• 11:08 The production check
• 12:00 Takeaway and next lesson

Core diagram

The five traps

1. Wiring everyone to everyone as the default architecture: add participants and the channels explode, bringing duplicated work and clashing conclusions with them.
2. Assuming a sub-agent inherits the coordinator's context automatically: if it is not written into the delegation, the sub-agent does not know it.
3. Running the entire roster on every task, regardless of complexity: it burns cost and imports conflicts nobody needed.
4. No validation between pipeline stations: one upstream error, amplified station by station into the final product.
5. Two coordinators with no division of labor: two centers, two inconsistent aggregations, worse than no center at all.

The production checklist

1. Exactly one role owns final aggregation and final adjudication; two centers is a defect, not a redundancy.
2. The channel picture is drawn and counted; any peer-to-peer link is local, between two or three participants, with a named owner for the outcome.
3. Every delegation writes its context explicitly; nothing a sub-agent needs is left to inheritance.
4. The roster is chosen per task, by complexity, and split by subtopic or source type, so no two sub-agents cover the same ground.
5. Every pipeline station validates before it passes work on, and the center carries headroom, monitoring, and a degraded mode planned for the day it fails.

Put it to work