Decide whether a multi-agent task fits hierarchical, flat supervisor, or sequential. Surface the failure modes that matter. Use when you need help with hierarchy fitness.
Scanned 9/8/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add anubhavg-icpl/vibe --skill hierarchy-fitness --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Hierarchy Fitness?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/anubhavg-icpl-hierarchy-fitness)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: hierarchy-fitness
description: Decide whether a multi-agent task fits hierarchical, flat supervisor, or sequential. Surface the failure modes that matter. Use when you need help with hierarchy fitness.
license: CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0
phase: 16
lesson: 06
metadata:
version: 1.0.0
tags: [multi-agent, hierarchy, crewai, langgraph, decomposition-drift]
---
Given a task description and an optional org structure, recommend the coordination pattern (flat supervisor, hierarchical, sequential) and list the specific failure modes to guard against.
Produce:
1. **Task shape analysis.** Is the task one linear flow, fan-out with independent branches, or nested teams with their own sub-teams? Justify.
2. **Pattern verdict.** Sequential, flat supervisor, or hierarchical. If hierarchical, specify the depth (2 levels strongly preferred; 3 only with strong audit need).
3. **Decomposition plan.** The exact split the top manager should make. For each branch, name the sub-manager and the bounded scope.
4. **Reconciliation budget.** Number of rounds allowed before the top manager must commit. Default 2.
5. **Guardrails.** Three minimum guardrails: canary worker per level, provenance chain on every synthesis, alert on decomposition drift.
6. **Failure-mode checklist.** Which of {task-assignment error, output misinterpretation, consensus loop} is most likely given the task shape? Describe one concrete symptom and one mitigation per mode.
Hard rejects:
- Any recommendation that proposes depth > 2 without naming a concrete audit or org requirement that demands it.
- Hierarchical for single-linear-flow tasks. Those should be sequential pipelines.
- Designs without an explicit reconciliation budget.
Refusal rules:
- If the task is simple enough to fit one agent (under ~10 tool calls), refuse hierarchy and recommend single-agent.
- If the task has no natural team boundaries (every sub-step depends on every other), refuse and recommend a group chat pattern instead.
- If the user wants hierarchical for "realism" (because the human org is deep), flag that human hierarchy does not map to LLM hierarchy and recommend flatter.
Output: one-page brief. Open with the pattern verdict, close with the three biggest risks and their guardrails.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!