agentleFS
CodeWithBehnamCodeWithBehnam/cc-docs/skills/team-workflow/team-composition-patterns/SKILL.md

team-composition-patterns

Skill2 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Design optimal agent team compositions with sizing heuristics, preset configurations, and agent type selection. Use this skill when deciding team size, selecting agent types, or configuring team presets for multi-agent workflows.

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Rule of thumb: Start with the smallest team that covers all required dimensions.

    line 28
  2. Very specific:

    When spawning teammates with the Task tool, choose subagent_type based on what tools the teammate needs:

    line 81
  3. Distinctive:

    Key distinction: Read-only agents (Explore, Plan) cannot modify files.

    line 93
  4. Distinctive:

    When building custom teams:

    line 113

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Team Composition Patterns

Best practices for composing multi-agent teams, selecting team sizes, choosing agent types, and configuring display modes for Claude Code's Agent Teams feature.

When to Use This Skill

  • Deciding how many teammates to spawn for a task
  • Choosing between preset team configurations
  • Selecting the right agent type (subagent_type) for each role
  • Configuring teammate display modes (tmux, iTerm2, in-process)
  • Building custom team compositions for non-standard workflows

Team Sizing Heuristics

ComplexityTeam SizeWhen to Use
Simple1-2Single-dimension review, isolated bug, small feature
Moderate2-3Multi-file changes, 2-3 concerns, medium features
Complex3-4Cross-cutting concerns, large features, deep debugging
Very Complex4-5Full-stack features, comprehensive reviews, systemic issues

Rule of thumb: Start with the smallest team that covers all required dimensions. Adding teammates increases coordination overhead.

Preset Team Compositions

Review Team

  • Size: 3 reviewers
  • Agents: 3x team-reviewer
  • Default dimensions: security, performance, architecture
  • Use when: Code changes need multi-dimensional quality assessment

Debug Team

  • Size: 3 investigators
  • Agents: 3x team-debugger
  • Default hypotheses: 3 competing hypotheses
  • Use when: Bug has multiple plausible root causes

Feature Team

  • Size: 3 (1 lead + 2 implementers)
  • Agents: 1x team-lead + 2x team-implementer
  • Use when: Feature can be decomposed into parallel work streams

Fullstack Team

  • Size: 4 (1 lead + 3 implementers)
  • Agents: 1x team-lead + 1x frontend team-implementer + 1x backend team-implementer + 1x test team-implementer
  • Use when: Feature spans frontend, backend, and test layers

Research Team

  • Size: 3 researchers
  • Agents: 3x general-purpose
  • Default areas: Each assigned a different research question, module, or topic
  • Capabilities: Codebase search (Grep, Glob, Read), web search (WebSearch, WebFetch)
  • Use when: Need to understand a codebase, research libraries, compare approaches, or gather information from code and web sources in parallel

Security Team

  • Size: 4 reviewers
  • Agents: 4x team-reviewer
  • Default dimensions: OWASP/vulnerabilities, auth/access control, dependencies/supply chain, secrets/configuration
  • Use when: Comprehensive security audit covering multiple attack surfaces

Migration Team

  • Size: 4 (1 lead + 2 implementers + 1 reviewer)
  • Agents: 1x team-lead + 2x team-implementer + 1x team-reviewer
  • Use when: Large codebase migration (framework upgrade, language port, API version bump) requiring parallel work with correctness verification

Agent Type Selection

When spawning teammates with the Task tool, choose subagent_type based on what tools the teammate needs:

Agent TypeTools AvailableUse For
general-purposeAll tools (Read, Write, Edit, Bash, etc.)Implementation, debugging, any task requiring file changes
ExploreRead-only tools (Read, Grep, Glob)Research, code exploration, analysis
PlanRead-only toolsArchitecture planning, task decomposition
agent-teams:team-reviewerAll toolsCode review with structured findings
agent-teams:team-debuggerAll toolsHypothesis-driven investigation
agent-teams:team-implementerAll toolsBuilding features within file ownership boundaries
agent-teams:team-leadAll toolsTeam orchestration and coordination

Key distinction: Read-only agents (Explore, Plan) cannot modify files. Never assign implementation tasks to read-only agents.

Display Mode Configuration

Configure in ~/.claude/settings.json:

{
  "teammateMode": "tmux"
}
ModeBehaviorBest For
"tmux"Each teammate in a tmux paneDevelopment workflows, monitoring multiple agents
"iterm2"Each teammate in an iTerm2 tabmacOS users who prefer iTerm2
"in-process"All teammates in same processSimple tasks, CI/CD environments

Custom Team Guidelines

When building custom teams:

  1. Every team needs a coordinator — Either designate a team-lead or have the user coordinate directly
  2. Match roles to agent types — Use specialized agents (reviewer, debugger, implementer) when available
  3. Avoid duplicate roles — Two agents doing the same thing wastes resources
  4. Define boundaries upfront — Each teammate needs clear ownership of files or responsibilities
  5. Keep it small — 2-4 teammates is the sweet spot; 5+ requires significant coordination overhead

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.