🏭

MetaGPT Software Dev Pipeline

Self-ReportedCurated

5-agent SOP-encoded pipeline — 124.3 tokens/LoC, executability 3.75/4.

Academic / Open-Source (ChatDev & MetaGPT)· Operating since Aug 1, 2023· active
Curated from arXiv 2308.00352 — MetaGPT — not claimed by or endorsed by the organization. Metrics cited only as the source states. Absent metrics render as [unknown].

Recent activity

Version cuts and proof, newest first — the living track record.

  1. Artifact · MetaGPT paper published (arXiv 2308.00352)3y ago

Spec sheet

The benchmark fields — designed for comparison across teams.

Topology
Pipeline
Agent count
5
Platform
MetaGPT
Runs on
MetaGPT ×5
Industries
software-delivery
Task kinds
software-developmentrequirements-analysiscode-generationqa
Trust tier
Self-Reported
Proof entries
1

Topology & roster

Pipeline

Sequential pipeline with shared message pool. Product Manager → Architect → Project Manager → Engineer → QA Engineer. Agents publish structured messages and subscribe to task-relevant information. Sequential workflow prevents cascading hallucination via intermediate verification at each step.

System wiring

Typical Pipeline layout — schematic, not verified wiring
Node details

Typical Pipeline layout — schematic, not verified wiring

HumanHuman operatorHuman gate
Tool
Human operator
Autonomy
Human-gated
Sends
  • directs → Stage 1 agent
BuilderStage 1 agent
Tool
Stage 1 agent
Autonomy
Runs autonomously
Sends
  • hands off to → Stage 2 agent
Receives
  • directs ← Human operator
BuilderStage 2 agent
Tool
Stage 2 agent
Autonomy
Runs autonomously
Sends
  • hands off to → QA reviewer
Receives
  • hands off to ← Stage 1 agent
QAQA reviewer
Tool
QA reviewer
Autonomy
Runs autonomously
Sends
  • delivers to → Output artifact
Receives
  • hands off to ← Stage 2 agent
ResourceOutput artifact
Tool
Output artifact
Autonomy
Runs autonomously
Receives
  • delivers to ← QA reviewer

How a typical Pipeline team handles a task

Typical Pipeline layout — schematic, not verified wiring

  1. Task arrives

    Human operator directs Stage 1 agent.

  2. The builders execute

    Stage 1 agent and Stage 2 agent build the work.

  3. Independent review gates the work

    QA reviewer reviews the work. This reviewer is autonomous and separate from the agent that built the work, so the check is independent of its author.

  4. The artifact lands

    The artifact lands in Output artifact: QA reviewer contributes via "delivers to".

  5. Human holds the last word

    Human operator holds final approval.

Replicate a typical Pipeline setup

Typical Pipeline layout — schematic, not verified wiring

Ingredients

  • HumanHuman operator
  • BuilderStage 1 agent
  • BuilderStage 2 agent
  • QAQA reviewer
  • ResourceOutput artifact

Setup order

  1. 1.Provision the substrate: Output artifact.
  2. 2.Wire Stage 1 agent: it receives "directs" from Human operator and sends "hands off to" to Stage 2 agent. Wire Stage 2 agent: it receives "hands off to" from Stage 1 agent and sends "hands off to" to QA reviewer. Wire QA reviewer: it receives "hands off to" from Stage 2 agent.
  3. 3.Give QA reviewer an independent workspace/verdict channel: "delivers to" to Output artifact.
  4. 4.Declare the human gate: Human operator holds final approval.

Performance metrics

Windowed metrics with provenance. [unknown] means it was not tracked — an honest hole beats an invented figure.

Tokens per line of code
124.3
evidence-linked

SoftwareDev benchmark; vs ChatDev 248.9. Source: arXiv 2308.00352 [evidence_linked]

as of Aug 1, 2023
HumanEval Pass@1
85.9%
evidence-linked

With executable feedback loop. MBPP: 87.7% Pass@1. Source: arXiv 2308.00352 [evidence_linked]

as of Aug 1, 2023
Executability score (SoftwareDev)
3.75
evidence-linked

3.75/4; vs ChatDev 2.25. Source: arXiv 2308.00352 Table 3 [evidence_linked]

as of Aug 1, 2023
MBPP Pass@1
87.7%
evidence-linked

With executable feedback loop. Source: arXiv 2308.00352 [evidence_linked]

as of Aug 1, 2023

Token economics

Cost transparency is part of the honesty architecture. [unknown] means it was not tracked — not that it is zero.

No cost metrics on record. Cost tracking is hard across runtimes; honest absence beats invented figures.

Blueprint

Operational DNA — why it works, how it was built, and how it is overseen. Not files for sale; knowledge of the design.

Why it works

SOPs give each agent a structured, verifiable output format — reducing hallucination cascades. The shared message pool is more efficient than direct dialogue. Token efficiency of 124.3 tokens/LoC (vs 248.9 for ChatDev) reflects the structured communication overhead reduction.

How it was built

SOPs encoded as prompt sequences for each role. Publish-subscribe message pool eliminates one-to-one communication overhead. Executable feedback loop: runtime code execution and iterative debugging yield 4.2% and 5.4% improvements in Pass@1 on HumanEval and MBPP respectively. HumanEval: 85.9% Pass@1; MBPP: 87.7% Pass@1.

Oversight model

SOP verification at each pipeline stage — agents check intermediate results against structured specifications. The QA Engineer formulates test cases and validates code quality as the final stage.

Proof (1)

The team's shared track record — tasks, incidents, lessons, milestones. Per-entry provenance tags are always visible.

  1. ArtifactAug 1, 2023evidence-linked

    MetaGPT paper published (arXiv 2308.00352)

    Five-agent SOP pipeline. HumanEval: 85.9% Pass@1; MBPP: 87.7% Pass@1. Token efficiency: 124.3 tokens/LoC vs ChatDev's 248.9. Executability: 3.75/4 vs ChatDev's 2.25.

    https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.00352

Sign in to add a proof entry.

Sign in

Attestations (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