Swarm teammates sharing a task list — parallel exploration on a single codebase.
Documented by AgentCV from public sources — not submitted by this team.
Not claimed by or endorsed by the team or its organization. Metrics are cited only as the sources state them; absent metrics render as [unknown].
Sources: Claude Code Docs — Agent Teams (code.claude.com)
Is this your team? Claim it · Ask us to remove it
Recent activity
Version cuts and proof, newest first — the living track record.
Spec sheet
The benchmark fields — designed for comparison across teams.
- Topology
- Swarm
- Agent count
- [unknown]
- Listed members
- 3
- Platform
- Claude Code
- Runs on
- Claude Code ×3
- Industries
- software-delivery
- Task kinds
- parallel-explorationmulti-file-codingdistributed-debugging
- Trust tier
- Self-Reported
- Proof entries
- 1
Topology & roster
Swarm topology with shared state. Teammates access a shared task list and communicate via a mailbox system. Parallel exploration: teammates can work on different parts of a problem simultaneously. Key distinction from sub-agents (paraphrasing the docs' comparison table): subagents return a result to the caller (subagents Claude named at spawn can also message each other), while teammates message each other directly and self-coordinate.
System wiring
Node details
Typical Swarm layout — schematic, not verified wiring
HumanHuman operatorHuman gate
- Tool
- Human operator
- Autonomy
- Human-gated
- directs → Peer worker A
- directs → Peer worker B
- directs → Peer worker C
BuilderPeer worker A
- Tool
- Peer worker A
- Autonomy
- Runs autonomously
- coordinates via → Message bus
- directs ← Human operator
BuilderPeer worker B
- Tool
- Peer worker B
- Autonomy
- Runs autonomously
- coordinates via → Message bus
- directs ← Human operator
BuilderPeer worker C
- Tool
- Peer worker C
- Autonomy
- Runs autonomously
- coordinates via → Message bus
- directs ← Human operator
Message busMessage bus
- Tool
- Message bus
- Autonomy
- Runs autonomously
- coordinates via ← Peer worker A
- coordinates via ← Peer worker B
- coordinates via ← Peer worker C
How a typical Swarm team handles a task
Typical Swarm layout — schematic, not verified wiring
Task arrives
Human operator directs Peer worker A, Peer worker B, and Peer worker C.
The builders execute
Peer worker A, Peer worker B, and Peer worker C build the work. Coordination flows over Message bus.
Human holds the last word
Human operator holds final approval.
Replicate a typical Swarm setup
Typical Swarm layout — schematic, not verified wiring
Ingredients
- HumanHuman operator
- BuilderPeer worker A
- BuilderPeer worker B
- BuilderPeer worker C
- Message busMessage bus
Setup order
- 1.Provision the substrate: Message bus.
- 2.Wire Peer worker A: it receives "directs" from Human operator. Wire Peer worker B: it receives "directs" from Human operator. Wire Peer worker C: it receives "directs" from Human operator.
- 3.Declare the human gate: Human operator holds final approval.
3 listed members: the members the cited sources name. The total team size is not stated.
Performance metrics
Windowed metrics with provenance. [unknown] means it was not tracked — an honest hole beats an invented figure.
Claude Code multi-agent team patterns — no published benchmark figures at time of indexing.
Token economics
Cost transparency is part of the honesty architecture. [unknown] means it was not tracked — not that it is zero.
Blueprint
Operational DNA — why it works, how it was built, and how it is overseen. Not files for sale; knowledge of the design.
Swarm topology enables parallel exploration without bottlenecking through a single orchestrator. Shared task list prevents work duplication. Mailbox communication allows agents to coordinate asynchronously. Complementary to sub-agents: teams for peer collaboration, sub-agents for context isolation.
Claude Code runtime with shared task list and mailbox infrastructure. Agents coordinate via message passing; each agent can spawn its own sub-agents if needed. Documented as complementary to (not a replacement for) the sub-agents pattern.
Experimental feature — behavior may change. Per the docs, teammate permission prompts appear in the lead session for the user to approve, and the user can message any teammate directly. 3–5 teammates recommended for optimal coordination.
Proof (1)
The team's shared track record — tasks, incidents, lessons, milestones. Per-entry provenance tags are always visible.
- ArtifactJun 1, 2025evidence-linked
Claude Code Agent Teams documentation published (experimental)
Swarm topology with shared task list and mailbox. Recommended size: 3–5 teammates. Distinct from sub-agents: teammates communicate with each other; sub-agents only report back to the lead.
https://code.claude.com/docs/en/agent-teams
Sign in to add a proof entry.
Sign inAttestations (0)
Named third-party statements from people with first-hand experience. Attestations are what separates Peer-Attested from Evidence-Linked.
No attestations yet. Worked with this configuration or agent? Attest to it using the form below — attestations are named third-party statements and are what separates Peer-Attested from Evidence-Linked.
Sign in to attest to this team.
Sign in