obra/superpowers

dispatching-parallel-agents

Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies

87CollectingReads files
See how to use itView GitHub source
npx skills add https://github.com/obra/superpowers --skill "skills/dispatching-parallel-agents"

Quick start

Start using it in three steps

Install it or open the source, trigger it with a clear task, then follow the source workflow.

1

Install the Skill

npx skills add https://github.com/obra/superpowers --skill "skills/dispatching-parallel-agents"
2

Describe the task

Use dispatching-parallel-agents to help me with: [describe your task]. Before you begin, tell me what input you need, the steps you will follow, and the expected output.

3

Follow the workflow

No structured workflow was detected; follow the original SKILL.md below.

Continue to the workflow

Direct answers

Answers to review before you install

What is dispatching-parallel-agents?

Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies

Who should use dispatching-parallel-agents?

It is relevant to workflows involving the tasks described in the upstream documentation.

How do you install dispatching-parallel-agents?

SkillSignal detected this source-specific command: npx skills add https://github.com/obra/superpowers --skill "skills/dispatching-parallel-agents". Inspect the repository and command before running it.

Which Agent platforms does it support?

The upstream source does not declare a dedicated Agent platform.

What permissions or risks should you review?

Static analysis detected read-files signals. Review the cited source lines before installing; these signals are not a security audit.

What are the current evidence limits?

This page combines upstream documentation with deterministic repository, quality, and static-risk signals. It is not described as a manual test or security review.

SkillSignal brief

Decide whether it fits your work first

Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies

Useful in these contexts

Not yet included in a workflow collection

Core capabilities

Distilled from the source

Understand this Skill in one minute

About 3 min · 9 sections

When it is worth using

  1. 3+ test files failing with different root causes

  2. Multiple subsystems broken independently

  3. Each problem can be understood without context from others

  4. No shared state between investigations

Limits and cautions

  1. ❌ Too broad: "Fix all the tests" - agent gets lost ✅ Specific: "Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts" - focused scope

  2. ❌ No context: "Fix the race condition" - agent doesn't know where ✅ Context: Paste the error messages and test names

  3. ❌ No constraints: Agent might refactor everything ✅ Constraints: "Do NOT change production code" or "Fix tests only"

  4. ❌ Vague output: "Fix it" - you don't know what changed ✅ Specific: "Return summary of root cause and changes"

Repository stars
262,331
Repository forks
23,424
Quality
87/100
Source repository last pushed

Quality breakdown

Based on traceable docs and repository signals; stars are not treated as quality.

87/100
Documentation27/30
Specificity20/25
Maintenance18/20
Trust signals22/25

Compare before choosing

Related Agent Skills and source variants

These links are selected from shared tasks, functions, stacks, platforms, and same-name variants. Compare the source owner, documentation, permissions, and maintenance signals.

ab-testing by coreyhaines31

When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," "growth experiments," "experiment velocity," "experiment backlog," "ICE score," "experimentation program

churn-prevention by coreyhaines31

When the user wants to reduce churn, build cancellation flows, set up save offers, recover failed payments, or implement retention strategies. Also use when the user mentions 'churn,' 'cancel flow,' 'offboarding,' 'save offer,' 'dunning,' 'failed payment recovery,' 'win-back,' 'retention,' 'exit survey,' 'pause subscription,' 'involuntary churn,' 'people keep canceling,' 'churn rate is too high,' 'how do I keep users,' or 'customers are leaving.' Use this whenever someone is losing subscribers o

design-intelligence by event4u-app

Grounded design brief from the adopted corpus — style, WCAG-checked color tokens, typography, layout pattern, anti-patterns. Use on ui-design-brief or any which-style/palette/font/chart decision.

design-system-capture by event4u-app

Write and maintain DESIGN.md + PRODUCT.md — captures visual decisions and interaction patterns so design tasks stay consistent across sessions without re-scanning past work.

existing-ui-audit by event4u-app

Use BEFORE writing or editing any non-trivial UI — inventories components, design tokens, shadcn primitives, and reusable patterns into state.ui_audit. Hard gate for the ui directive set.

View original Skill.mdThis page is parsed directly from the repository SKILL.md without editorial rewriting. Collected: Jul 28, 2026 · about 3 min

Dispatching Parallel Agents

Overview

You delegate tasks to specialized agents with isolated context. By precisely crafting their instructions and context, you ensure they stay focused and succeed at their task. They should never inherit your session's context or history — you construct exactly what they need. This also preserves your own context for coordination work.

When you have multiple unrelated failures (different test files, different subsystems, different bugs), investigating them sequentially wastes time. Each investigation is independent and can happen in parallel.

Core principle: Dispatch one agent per independent problem domain. Let them work concurrently.

When to Use

digraph when_to_use {
    "Multiple failures?" [shape=diamond];
    "Are they independent?" [shape=diamond];
    "Single agent investigates all" [shape=box];
    "One agent per problem domain" [shape=box];
    "Can they work in parallel?" [shape=diamond];
    "Sequential agents" [shape=box];
    "Parallel dispatch" [shape=box];

    "Multiple failures?" -> "Are they independent?" [label="yes"];
    "Are they independent?" -> "Single agent investigates all" [label="no - related"];
    "Are they independent?" -> "Can they work in parallel?" [label="yes"];
    "Can they work in parallel?" -> "Parallel dispatch" [label="yes"];
    "Can they work in parallel?" -> "Sequential agents" [label="no - shared state"];
}

Use when:

  • 3+ test files failing with different root causes
  • Multiple subsystems broken independently
  • Each problem can be understood without context from others
  • No shared state between investigations

Don't use when:

  • Failures are related (fix one might fix others)
  • Need to understand full system state
  • Agents would interfere with each other

The Pattern

1. Identify Independent Domains

Group failures by what's broken:

  • File A tests: Tool approval flow
  • File B tests: Batch completion behavior
  • File C tests: Abort functionality

Each domain is independent - fixing tool approval doesn't affect abort tests.

2. Create Focused Agent Tasks

Each agent gets:

  • Specific scope: One test file or subsystem
  • Clear goal: Make these tests pass
  • Constraints: Don't change other code
  • Expected output: Summary of what you found and fixed

3. Dispatch in Parallel

Issue all three subagent dispatches in the same response — they run in parallel:

Subagent (general-purpose): "Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts failures"
Subagent (general-purpose): "Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts failures"
Subagent (general-purpose): "Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts failures"
# All three run concurrently.

Multiple dispatch calls in one response = parallel execution. One per response = sequential.

4. Review and Integrate

When agents return:

  • Read each summary
  • Verify fixes don't conflict
  • Run full test suite
  • Integrate all changes

Agent Prompt Structure

Good agent prompts are:

  1. Focused - One clear problem domain
  2. Self-contained - All context needed to understand the problem
  3. Specific about output - What should the agent return?
Fix the 3 failing tests in src/agents/agent-tool-abort.test.ts:

1. "should abort tool with partial output capture" - expects 'interrupted at' in message
2. "should handle mixed completed and aborted tools" - fast tool aborted instead of completed
3. "should properly track pendingToolCount" - expects 3 results but gets 0

These are timing/race condition issues. Your task:

1. Read the test file and understand what each test verifies
2. Identify root cause - timing issues or actual bugs?
3. Fix by:
   - Replacing arbitrary timeouts with event-based waiting
   - Fixing bugs in abort implementation if found
   - Adjusting test expectations if testing changed behavior

Do NOT just increase timeouts - find the real issue.

Return: Summary of what you found and what you fixed.

Common Mistakes

❌ Too broad: "Fix all the tests" - agent gets lost ✅ Specific: "Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts" - focused scope

❌ No context: "Fix the race condition" - agent doesn't know where ✅ Context: Paste the error messages and test names

❌ No constraints: Agent might refactor everything ✅ Constraints: "Do NOT change production code" or "Fix tests only"

❌ Vague output: "Fix it" - you don't know what changed ✅ Specific: "Return summary of root cause and changes"

When NOT to Use

Related failures: Fixing one might fix others - investigate together first Need full context: Understanding requires seeing entire system Exploratory debugging: You don't know what's broken yet Shared state: Agents would interfere (editing same files, using same resources)

Real Example from Session

Scenario: 6 test failures across 3 files after major refactoring

Failures:

  • agent-tool-abort.test.ts: 3 failures (timing issues)
  • batch-completion-behavior.test.ts: 2 failures (tools not executing)
  • tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts: 1 failure (execution count = 0)

Decision: Independent domains - abort logic separate from batch completion separate from race conditions

Dispatch:

Agent 1 → Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts
Agent 2 → Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts
Agent 3 → Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts

Results:

  • Agent 1: Replaced timeouts with event-based waiting
  • Agent 2: Fixed event structure bug (threadId in wrong place)
  • Agent 3: Added wait for async tool execution to complete

Integration: All fixes independent, no conflicts, full suite green

Verification

After agents return:

  1. Review each summary - Understand what changed
  2. Check for conflicts - Did agents edit same code?
  3. Run full suite - Verify all fixes work together
  4. Spot check - Agents can make systematic errors
Source repo
obra/superpowers
Skill path
skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md
Commit SHA
3dcbd5c4b48e
Repository license
MIT
Data collected