One-liner: Architect a complete multi-agent workflow for a real project — defining roles, inputs, outputs, handoffs, and a feedback loop — then test it.
Pick a real project that involves at least three distinct types of work (research, analysis, creation, review, etc.). Examples: writing a report, planning an event, developing a proposal, building a content calendar.
Design a 3-4 agent workflow on paper or in a doc. For each agent, define:
| Agent Role | What it receives (input) | What it produces (output) | Handoff trigger |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent 1: Researcher | The project brief | A structured summary of key findings | "Research complete" + summary ready |
| Agent 2: Drafter | Research summary + project brief | A first draft | Draft complete |
| Agent 3: Critic | The draft + original brief | Specific critique with improvement suggestions | Review complete |
| Agent 4: Editor | Draft + critique notes | Final polished output | Revisions applied |
Now implement it using chained AI prompts. Open a chat for each agent (or reuse one chat with fresh role prompts). Run the workflow end-to-end:
Agent 1 prompt:
You are a research analyst. Your job is to gather and organize relevant information. Here is the project brief: [paste your brief]. Produce a structured summary of the key information I'll need. Organize it by theme. Include 3-5 key insights and any risks or gaps you see.
Take Agent 1's output and feed it to Agent 2:
Agent 2 prompt:
You are a content drafter. Your job is to turn research into a clear first draft. Here is the project brief: [paste brief]. Here is the research summary: [paste Agent 1 output]. Write a first draft that addresses the brief. Focus on clarity and completeness. Don't self-edit — that's someone else's job.
Take Agent 2's output and feed it to Agent 3:
Agent 3 prompt:
You are a critical reviewer. Your job is to find weaknesses and suggest improvements. Here is the original brief: [paste brief]. Here is the draft: [paste Agent 2 output]. Identify: (1) gaps — what's missing that the brief requires, (2) weaknesses — arguments or sections that aren't convincing, (3) specific improvement suggestions with rationale. Do NOT rewrite the draft. Just critique.
Take the draft and critique to Agent 4:
Agent 4 prompt:
You are a senior editor. Your job is to produce the final version. Here is the draft: [paste Agent 2 output]. Here is the review feedback: [paste Agent 3 output]. Revise the draft to address the critique. Maintain the original structure where it works. Explain your key changes in a brief editor's note at the end.
Feedback loop (optional): Take the final output and feed it back to Agent 3 for a second review. Notice how the quality changes with each iteration.
Here's what you're about to do:
"Done" looks like: You have a documented agent workflow (the architecture) and a finished output that went through the full pipeline. You can explain why you split the work the way you did and what each agent contributed.
This is what agent collaboration looks like at professional scale — architecture before implementation. Every multi-agent framework (CrewAI, AutoGen, LangGraph) requires you to define roles, handoffs, and feedback loops before writing a single line of code. By doing it manually first, you understand the design decisions that make or break an agent system: what context each agent needs, where handoffs lose information, and when feedback loops help vs. when they add noise. This exercise builds the mental model that transfers to any agent tooling.
You've reached the advanced level for Agent Collaboration. From here, consider:
Back to Agent Collaboration