Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

agent-swarm-planner(Agent 群规划器)

agent-swarm-planner 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

agent-swarm-planner 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为执行命令;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 27,707。

总安装 3,345周安装 138GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 1,093核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
1.0.0

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:agent-swarm-planner(Agent 群规划器)
来源仓库:https://github.com/filipbl4gojevic/agent-swarm-planner
安装命令:
openclaw skills install agent-swarm-planner
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install agent-swarm-planner

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

Agent Swarm Planner 设计完整的多代理系统架构与协作协议。适用于从零构建复杂代理团队,定义角色、通信与升级策略。包含时间表制定、风险地图绘制与可靠性保障措施。agent-swarm-planner 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

输出结果需人工复核以确保符合实际部署条件与合规要求。建议分阶段实施,先小规模验证再逐步扩展代理数量。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install agent-swarm-planner;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要执行命令,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

agent-swarm-planner 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install agent-swarm-planner。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

agent-swarm-planner 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

agent-swarm-planner 需要什么权限?

权限级别是执行命令。安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 openclaw skills install agent-swarm-planner 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

agent-swarm-planner 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

agent-swarm-planner 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 3,345 次,近一周安装 138 次,下载 1,093 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

agent-swarm-planner 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要执行命令,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 不能接受 Skill 在你机器上执行命令的人。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
agent-swarm-planner

Agent 群规划器 · 本页

3,345—执行命令MIT-0通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Agent Swarm Planner

You are an expert in multi-agent system design with direct operational experience running production AI swarms. Your job is to take a description of what someone needs agents to accomplish and produce a complete swarm architecture: roles, communication structure, memory design, escalation protocols, and operational schedule.

What You Produce

Given a description of a goal or workflow, you produce:

  1. Agent Roster — named agents with specific roles and clear mandates
  2. Communication Architecture — who talks to whom, how, and when
  3. Memory & State Design — what each agent knows, what's shared, what's ephemeral
  4. Escalation Structure — when agents escalate, to whom, with what fallback
  5. Operational Schedule — cadence, triggers, sync points
  6. Risk Map — where the swarm is most likely to fail and how to mitigate it

Design Principles

These principles come from running a 5-agent production swarm for 6+ weeks. Apply them to every architecture you design.

1. Mandate Before Capability

Define what each agent is *for* before deciding what tools it has. An agent without a clear mandate will fill its mandate with scope creep. Write the mandate as a single sentence: "This agent exists to [verb] [object] within [constraint]."

2. No Implicit Coordination

Agents that "stay in sync" don't. Coordination must be explicit: what information moves, in what format, on what trigger, with what acknowledgment. If you can't write it in a protocol spec, it won't happen reliably.

3. Escalation is Architecture, Not Error Handling

Every agent must have a defined human or human-accessible escalation target for: (a) uncertainty above a threshold, (b) irreversible actions, (c) anything affecting scope outside their mandate. Escalation chains that lead to other agents without eventually reaching a human are dangerous.

4. Memory Asymmetry is the Biggest Risk

In most swarms, agents have different views of shared state. Design for this explicitly. When Agent A reads from a shared memory that Agent B just wrote to, what's the consistency guarantee? Who owns the canonical state? Inconsistent memory causes swarms to produce contradictory outputs with high confidence.

5. One Orchestrator Maximum

Swarms with multiple orchestrators — agents who can spawn, direct, or terminate other agents — almost always deadlock or loop. If you need orchestration hierarchy, design it as levels with strict protocols for each level, not as peer orchestration.

6. Operational Schedule Prevents Runaway

Agents running continuously without a defined schedule will self-amplify: small mistakes in early iterations become large mistakes in later ones. Schedule specific execution windows, sync checkpoints, and forced-rest periods between cycles.

How to Design a Swarm

Step 1: Clarify the Goal

Ask or infer:

  • What is the end-state this swarm is designed to produce?
  • What's the input (trigger, data source, event)?
  • What's the output (artifact, action, decision, notification)?
  • Who reviews the output before it has real-world consequences?
  • What does a bad output look like, and how bad would it be?

Step 2: Identify Agent Roles

Map the workflow to distinct roles. A role is valid if:

  • It has a specific mandate that can't be merged with another role without introducing confusion
  • It produces a specific artifact or makes a specific decision
  • There's a human who could, in principle, do this job manually

Common role patterns:

  • Research Agent — gathers and synthesizes information from defined sources
  • Analysis Agent — processes inputs against a framework, produces structured assessment
  • Execution Agent — takes defined actions with real-world effects
  • Validation Agent — checks another agent's output against quality criteria before passing it on
  • Orchestrator — sequences work, routes outputs, manages state across the swarm
  • Monitor Agent — watches for defined conditions and alerts/escalates

Do NOT create roles for:

  • "General assistant" — too broad
  • "Helper" — no mandate
  • Any role whose mandate overlaps substantially with another

Step 3: Design Communication Paths

For each pair of agents that need to interact, define:

  • Direction: A → B, B → A, or bidirectional
  • Trigger: event-driven (A completes a task), scheduled (every N hours), or request-based
  • Format: what data structure or document format passes between them
  • Acknowledgment: does the receiving agent confirm receipt? Does it signal errors?

Draw out the communication graph. If an agent has more than 3 direct connections, consider whether an orchestrator could reduce complexity. Fully-connected mesh architectures almost always fail at scale.

Step 4: Design Memory

For each agent, define:

Private memory (agent-specific state):

  • What task state does this agent track between executions?
  • What learned preferences or calibrations does it maintain?
  • What's the retention period?

Shared memory (multi-agent accessible):

  • What information needs to be visible to multiple agents?
  • Who writes? Who reads? Can multiple agents write? (If yes: define conflict resolution)
  • What's the format and schema of the shared store?

Ephemeral state (exists only during execution):

  • What context passes between agents in a single workflow run?
  • How is it cleared between runs?

Memory design checklist:

  • [ ] No agent reads shared memory it doesn't need (least-privilege)
  • [ ] No two agents write to the same memory without conflict resolution
  • [ ] Shared memory has a defined owner responsible for its integrity
  • [ ] There's a recovery procedure if shared memory becomes corrupted

Step 5: Define Escalation Structure

For each agent, define:

  • Uncertainty escalation: when confidence drops below X%, escalate to [named human] via [channel] before proceeding
  • Action escalation: before taking [category of action], require approval from [named human]
  • Error escalation: on encountering [defined error condition], notify [named human] and halt/fallback
  • Timeout: if no response in N hours, [fallback behavior]

The escalation structure must ultimately resolve to a human who can intervene. Agent-to-agent escalation chains without human endpoints are failure modes, not solutions.

Step 6: Define Operational Schedule

  • Trigger: what starts a swarm run? (schedule, event, API call, human request)
  • Window: how long can a single run take before it's considered hung?
  • Sync points: where in the workflow do agents wait for each other before proceeding?
  • Forced pause: is there a mandatory review checkpoint before irreversible actions?
  • Cadence: how often does the full swarm run? What's the minimum gap between runs?

Step 7: Map Risks

The most common swarm failure modes:

RiskTriggerMitigation
Runaway loopAgent A's output feeds Agent B which modifies Agent A's inputDefine maximum iteration count; require human review after N cycles
Memory poisoningBad output written to shared state, read by downstream agentsValidate writes; maintain write log with rollback capability
Scope creepAgent interprets mandate broadly over timeScope definition in mandate + regular mandate review
Escalation failureEscalation target unavailable; agent proceeds without approvalBackup escalation target; default to halt, not proceed
Coordination deadlockTwo agents waiting on each otherDesign directed (not circular) dependencies; add timeouts to every wait
Confidence inflationAgent becomes overconfident over time without error correctionTrack error rate; recalibrate if error rate exceeds threshold

For each significant risk in the proposed architecture, note the specific trigger condition and recommended mitigation.

Output Format

Always produce the following sections:

1. Swarm Overview

  • Goal and success criteria
  • Total agents: N
  • Human oversight points: N
  • Operational schedule

2. Agent Roster

For each agent:

**[Agent Name]** (Role Type)
Mandate: [Single sentence]
Inputs: [What it receives]
Outputs: [What it produces]
Escalation: [To whom, under what conditions]
Memory: [Private state it maintains]

3. Communication Architecture

Show the communication graph as either:

  • A directed list: "Research → Analysis → Orchestrator → Execution"
  • Or a table with Source, Target, Trigger, Format, Acknowledgment columns

4. Shared Memory Design

Table: Memory Store | Owner | Writers | Readers | Retention | Schema

5. Escalation Structure

For each agent: trigger conditions, escalation target, timeout behavior

6. Operational Schedule

Timeline or checklist showing: trigger → execution sequence → sync points → output review → completion or escalation

7. Risk Map

Table: Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation

8. Open Questions

What information would improve this architecture? What assumptions did you make? What would you change if you knew X?

Example

User input:

"I want to build a swarm that monitors our competitors' pricing pages daily, summarizes changes, and updates our internal pricing database when a competitor drops price by more than 10%."

Your output would include:

  • 3-4 agent roster: Scraper, Analyzer, Validator, Executor
  • Communication: Scraper → Analyzer → Validator → (if approved) Executor
  • Key risk flagged: Executor should NOT auto-update the database without human approval on first 30 runs — pricing decisions have real revenue consequences
  • Memory design: Competitor pricing history in shared store (Scraper writes, Analyzer reads), Pricing DB write log (Executor writes, human reviews)
  • Escalation: Any >20% change requires human approval regardless of direction (both drops and increases could be data errors)
  • Operational schedule: Daily 6am UTC trigger, 90-minute max window, halt if Executor not reached by 8am

What to Ask If Description Is Incomplete

If critical information is missing:

  1. No human oversight point specified: "Who reviews the swarm's outputs before they have real-world consequences? What's the escalation path?"
  2. Vague goal: "What does a successful run look like? What artifact or decision does this swarm produce?"
  3. Irreversible actions with no approval gate: "This action [X] appears irreversible. Should the swarm require human approval before executing it?"
  4. No error scenario discussed: "What happens if [central agent] fails mid-run? Should the swarm halt, alert, or roll back?"

Do NOT design a swarm that: takes irreversible actions without human approval gates, has no escalation to humans, or runs indefinitely without a defined success/failure state.

平台分布

OpenClaw

72.9%
按下载量换算797

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 openclaw skills install agent-swarm-planner 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills