Skip to content
Back to skills

Langgraph Architecture

ASecurity

Guides architectural decisions for LangGraph applications. Use when deciding between LangGraph vs alternatives, choosing state management strategies, designing multi-agent systems, or selecting persistence and streaming approaches.

  • 666 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added May 31, 2026
businesspythongosqlnodetestingdebuggingapiperformance

Works with

  • api

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned May 31, 2026

npx -y skills add majiayu000/claude-skill-registry --skill langgraph-architecture --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Langgraph Architecture?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Langgraph Architecture
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/majiayu000-langgraph-architecture/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/majiayu000-langgraph-architecture)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: langgraph-architecture
description: Guides architectural decisions for LangGraph applications. Use when deciding between LangGraph vs alternatives, choosing state management strategies, designing multi-agent systems, or selecting persistence and streaming approaches.
---

# LangGraph Architecture Decisions

## When to Use LangGraph

### Use LangGraph When You Need:

- **Stateful conversations** - Multi-turn interactions with memory
- **Human-in-the-loop** - Approval gates, corrections, interventions
- **Complex control flow** - Loops, branches, conditional routing
- **Multi-agent coordination** - Multiple LLMs working together
- **Persistence** - Resume from checkpoints, time travel debugging
- **Streaming** - Real-time token streaming, progress updates
- **Reliability** - Retries, error recovery, durability guarantees

### Consider Alternatives When:

| Scenario | Alternative | Why |
|----------|-------------|-----|
| Single LLM call | Direct API call | Overhead not justified |
| Linear pipeline | LangChain LCEL | Simpler abstraction |
| Stateless tool use | Function calling | No persistence needed |
| Simple RAG | LangChain retrievers | Built-in patterns |
| Batch processing | Async tasks | Different execution model |

## State Schema Decisions

### TypedDict vs Pydantic

| TypedDict | Pydantic |
|-----------|----------|
| Lightweight, faster | Runtime validation |
| Dict-like access | Attribute access |
| No validation overhead | Type coercion |
| Simpler serialization | Complex nested models |

**Recommendation**: Use TypedDict for most cases. Use Pydantic when you need validation or complex nested structures.

### Reducer Selection

| Use Case | Reducer | Example |
|----------|---------|---------|
| Chat messages | `add_messages` | Handles IDs, RemoveMessage |
| Simple append | `operator.add` | `Annotated[list, operator.add]` |
| Keep latest | None (LastValue) | `field: str` |
| Custom merge | Lambda | `Annotated[list, lambda a, b: ...]` |
| Overwrite list | `Overwrite` | Bypass reducer |

### State Size Considerations

```python
# SMALL STATE (< 1MB) - Put in state
class State(TypedDict):
    messages: Annotated[list, add_messages]
    context: str

# LARGE DATA - Use Store
class State(TypedDict):
    messages: Annotated[list, add_messages]
    document_ref: str  # Reference to store

def node(state, *, store: BaseStore):
    doc = store.get(namespace, state["document_ref"])
    # Process without bloating checkpoints
```

## Graph Structure Decisions

### Single Graph vs Subgraphs

**Single Graph** when:
- All nodes share the same state schema
- Simple linear or branching flow
- < 10 nodes

**Subgraphs** when:
- Different state schemas needed
- Reusable components across graphs
- Team separation of concerns
- Complex hierarchical workflows

### Conditional Edges vs Command

| Conditional Edges | Command |
|------------------|---------|
| Routing based on state | Routing + state update |
| Separate router function | Decision in node |
| Clearer visualization | More flexible |
| Standard patterns | Dynamic destinations |

```python
# Conditional Edge - when routing is the focus
def router(state) -> Literal["a", "b"]:
    return "a" if condition else "b"
builder.add_conditional_edges("node", router)

# Command - when combining routing with updates
def node(state) -> Command:
    return Command(goto="next", update={"step": state["step"] + 1})
```

### Static vs Dynamic Routing

**Static Edges** (`add_edge`):
- Fixed flow known at build time
- Clearer graph visualization
- Easier to reason about

**Dynamic Routing** (`add_conditional_edges`, `Command`, `Send`):
- Runtime decisions based on state
- Agent-driven navigation
- Fan-out patterns

## Persistence Strategy

### Checkpointer Selection

| Checkpointer | Use Case | Characteristics |
|--------------|----------|-----------------|
| `InMemorySaver` | Testing only | Lost on restart |
| `SqliteSaver` | Development | Single file, local |
| `PostgresSaver` | Production | Scalable, concurrent |
| Custom | Special needs | Implement BaseCheckpointSaver |

### Checkpointing Scope

```python
# Full persistence (default)
graph = builder.compile(checkpointer=checkpointer)

# Subgraph options
subgraph = sub_builder.compile(
    checkpointer=None,   # Inherit from parent
    checkpointer=True,   # Independent checkpointing
    checkpointer=False,  # No checkpointing (runs atomically)
)
```

### When to Disable Checkpointing

- Short-lived subgraphs that should be atomic
- Subgraphs with incompatible state schemas
- Performance-critical paths without need for resume

## Multi-Agent Architecture

### Supervisor Pattern

Best for:
- Clear hierarchy
- Centralized decision making
- Different agent specializations

```
          ┌─────────────┐
          │  Supervisor │
          └──────┬──────┘
    ┌────────┬───┴───┬────────┐
    ▼        ▼       ▼        ▼
┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐
│Agent1│ │Agent2│ │Agent3│ │Agent4│
└──────┘ └──────┘ └──────┘ └──────┘
```

### Peer-to-Peer Pattern

Best for:
- Collaborative agents
- No clear hierarchy
- Flexible communication

```
┌──────┐     ┌──────┐
│Agent1│◄───►│Agent2│
└──┬───┘     └───┬──┘
   │             │
   ▼             ▼
┌──────┐     ┌──────┐
│Agent3│◄───►│Agent4│
└──────┘     └──────┘
```

### Handoff Pattern

Best for:
- Sequential specialization
- Clear stage transitions
- Different capabilities per stage

```
┌────────┐    ┌────────┐    ┌────────┐
│Research│───►│Planning│───►│Execute │
└────────┘    └────────┘    └────────┘
```

## Streaming Strategy

### Stream Mode Selection

| Mode | Use Case | Data |
|------|----------|------|
| `updates` | UI updates | Node outputs only |
| `values` | State inspection | Full state each step |
| `messages` | Chat UX | LLM tokens |
| `custom` | Progress/logs | Your data via StreamWriter |
| `debug` | Debugging | Tasks + checkpoints |

### Subgraph Streaming

```python
# Stream from subgraphs
async for chunk in graph.astream(
    input,
    stream_mode="updates",
    subgraphs=True  # Include subgraph events
):
    namespace, data = chunk  # namespace indicates depth
```

## Human-in-the-Loop Design

### Interrupt Placement

| Strategy | Use Case |
|----------|----------|
| `interrupt_before` | Approval before action |
| `interrupt_after` | Review after completion |
| `interrupt()` in node | Dynamic, contextual pauses |

### Resume Patterns

```python
# Simple resume (same thread)
graph.invoke(None, config)

# Resume with value
graph.invoke(Command(resume="approved"), config)

# Resume specific interrupt
graph.invoke(Command(resume={interrupt_id: value}), config)

# Modify state and resume
graph.update_state(config, {"field": "new_value"})
graph.invoke(None, config)
```

## Error Handling Strategy

### Retry Configuration

```python
# Per-node retry
RetryPolicy(
    initial_interval=0.5,
    backoff_factor=2.0,
    max_interval=60.0,
    max_attempts=3,
    retry_on=lambda e: isinstance(e, (APIError, TimeoutError))
)

# Multiple policies (first match wins)
builder.add_node("node", fn, retry_policy=[
    RetryPolicy(retry_on=RateLimitError, max_attempts=5),
    RetryPolicy(retry_on=Exception, max_attempts=2),
])
```

### Fallback Patterns

```python
def node_with_fallback(state):
    try:
        return primary_operation(state)
    except PrimaryError:
        return fallback_operation(state)

# Or use conditional edges for complex fallback routing
def route_on_error(state) -> Literal["retry", "fallback", "__end__"]:
    if state.get("error") and state["attempts"] < 3:
        return "retry"
    elif state.get("error"):
        return "fallback"
    return END
```

## Scaling Considerations

### Horizontal Scaling

- Use PostgresSaver for shared state
- Consider LangGraph Platform for managed infrastructure
- Use stores for large data outside checkpoints

### Performance Optimization

1. **Minimize state size** - Use references for large data
2. **Parallel nodes** - Fan out when possible
3. **Cache expensive operations** - Use CachePolicy
4. **Async everywhere** - Use ainvoke, astream

### Resource Limits

```python
# Set recursion limit
config = {"recursion_limit": 50}
graph.invoke(input, config)

# Track remaining steps in state
class State(TypedDict):
    remaining_steps: RemainingSteps

def check_budget(state):
    if state["remaining_steps"] < 5:
        return "wrap_up"
    return "continue"
```

## Decision Checklist

Before implementing:

1. [ ] Is LangGraph the right tool? (vs simpler alternatives)
2. [ ] State schema defined with appropriate reducers?
3. [ ] Persistence strategy chosen? (dev vs prod checkpointer)
4. [ ] Streaming needs identified?
5. [ ] Human-in-the-loop points defined?
6. [ ] Error handling and retry strategy?
7. [ ] Multi-agent coordination pattern? (if applicable)
8. [ ] Resource limits configured?

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.