# Multi-Agent vs Single-Agent Systems: When to Use Each

*A practical guide to choosing the right architecture for your AI application*

---

When building AI applications, one of the first architectural decisions is whether to use a single agent or multiple agents working together. This guide breaks down when each approach makes sense.

---

## Single-Agent Systems

### What They Are
A single agent handles all tasks, tool calls, and decision-making within one unified process.

```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│              Single Agent               │
│  ┌─────────────────────────────────┐   │
│  │         LLM Brain                │   │
│  │  • Reasoning                     │   │
│  │  • Planning                      │   │
│  │  • Tool Selection                │   │
│  │  • Execution                     │   │
│  └─────────────────────────────────┘   │
│                  │                      │
│  ┌───────────────┴───────────────┐     │
│  │           Tools               │     │
│  │  [A] [B] [C] [D] [E] [F]      │     │
│  └───────────────────────────────┘     │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
```

### Advantages
- **Simpler to build**: One agent, one context, one conversation
- **Lower latency**: No inter-agent communication overhead
- **Easier debugging**: Single point of execution to trace
- **Lower cost**: Fewer LLM calls overall
- **Unified context**: All information in one place

### Disadvantages
- **Context limits**: One agent must fit everything in its context window
- **Jack of all trades**: Hard to optimize for specialized tasks
- **Single point of failure**: If the agent fails, everything fails
- **Limited parallelism**: Sequential execution of tasks

### Best Use Cases
1. **Simple Q&A chatbots**: Direct user interaction
2. **Single-purpose tools**: One task done well
3. **Prototype development**: Quick iteration
4. **Low-complexity workflows**: Linear task sequences
5. **Cost-sensitive applications**: Minimizing LLM usage

---

## Multi-Agent Systems

### What They Are
Multiple specialized agents collaborate, each handling specific tasks or domains.

```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                  Multi-Agent System                     │
│                                                         │
│  ┌───────────┐   ┌───────────┐   ┌───────────┐        │
│  │  Agent A  │   │  Agent B  │   │  Agent C  │        │
│  │ Researcher│   │  Writer   │   │ Reviewer  │        │
│  │   [🔍]    │   │   [✍️]    │   │   [✓]     │        │
│  └─────┬─────┘   └─────┬─────┘   └─────┬─────┘        │
│        │               │               │               │
│        └───────────────┼───────────────┘               │
│                        ▼                               │
│              ┌─────────────────┐                       │
│              │   Coordinator   │                       │
│              │   / Orchestrator│                       │
│              └─────────────────┘                       │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```

### Advantages
- **Specialization**: Each agent optimized for its domain
- **Scalability**: Add new agents for new capabilities
- **Parallelism**: Multiple agents work simultaneously
- **Fault isolation**: One agent failing doesn't crash everything
- **Better context management**: Each agent has focused context

### Disadvantages
- **Coordination complexity**: Managing agent communication
- **Higher latency**: Inter-agent handoffs add time
- **More expensive**: More LLM calls for coordination
- **Debugging difficulty**: Distributed execution traces
- **Potential conflicts**: Agents may have conflicting outputs

### Best Use Cases
1. **Complex research tasks**: Multiple perspectives needed
2. **Content pipelines**: Research → Write → Edit → Publish
3. **Enterprise workflows**: Different departments/functions
4. **Self-improving systems**: Separate learning from execution
5. **High-reliability systems**: Redundancy and verification

---

## Framework Comparison

| Framework | Single-Agent | Multi-Agent | Coordination Style |
|-----------|--------------|-------------|-------------------|
| LangChain | Excellent | Basic | Manual chains |
| CrewAI | Good | Excellent | Role-based crews |
| AutoGen | Good | Excellent | Conversation-based |
| Aden | Excellent | Excellent | Goal-driven + Self-improving |

---

## Aden's Hybrid Approach

Aden takes a unique approach by combining both paradigms:

### The Two-Agent Core
```
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                      Aden System                           │
│                                                            │
│  ┌──────────────────┐     ┌──────────────────────────┐   │
│  │   Coding Agent   │     │     Worker Agents        │   │
│  │  (Single, Meta)  │────▶│  (Multi, Specialized)    │   │
│  │                  │     │  ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐      │   │
│  │  • Generates     │     │  │Agent1│ │Agent2│ ...  │   │
│  │  • Improves      │     │  └──────┘ └──────┘      │   │
│  │  • Orchestrates  │     │                          │   │
│  └──────────────────┘     └──────────────────────────┘   │
│           │                           │                   │
│           └───────────────────────────┘                   │
│                         │                                 │
│              ┌──────────▼──────────┐                     │
│              │    Control Plane    │                     │
│              │  Budgets • Policies │                     │
│              └─────────────────────┘                     │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```

### How It Works
1. **Single Meta-Agent**: The Coding Agent acts as a single intelligent orchestrator
2. **Multi-Agent Execution**: Worker Agents are specialized and run in parallel
3. **Best of Both**: Simple development (goal-based) with multi-agent power
4. **Self-Improving**: The system evolves based on execution feedback

### When Aden Shines
- You want multi-agent power without multi-agent complexity
- Your system needs to improve itself over time
- You need production controls (budgets, HITL, monitoring)
- You're building complex workflows from natural language goals

---

## Decision Framework

Use this flowchart to decide:

```
                    Start
                      │
                      ▼
          ┌─────────────────────┐
          │  Is the task        │
          │  single-purpose?    │
          └──────────┬──────────┘
                     │
           Yes ◄─────┴─────► No
            │                 │
            ▼                 ▼
    ┌───────────────┐  ┌────────────────────┐
    │ Single Agent  │  │ Do tasks need      │
    │ is sufficient │  │ different expertise?│
    └───────────────┘  └─────────┬──────────┘
                                 │
                       Yes ◄─────┴─────► No
                        │                 │
                        ▼                 ▼
               ┌────────────────┐  ┌────────────────┐
               │  Multi-Agent   │  │  Could benefit │
               │  Recommended   │  │  from parallel │
               └────────────────┘  │  execution?    │
                                   └────────┬───────┘
                                            │
                                  Yes ◄─────┴─────► No
                                   │                │
                                   ▼                ▼
                          ┌────────────────┐ ┌────────────┐
                          │  Multi-Agent   │ │ Single     │
                          │  for speed     │ │ Agent OK   │
                          └────────────────┘ └────────────┘
```

---

## Practical Examples

### Example 1: Customer Support Bot
**Recommended: Single Agent**

Why: Direct Q&A, unified context, low latency needed
```
User Question → Single Agent → Answer
```

### Example 2: Research Report Generator
**Recommended: Multi-Agent**

Why: Multiple sources, different skills, quality review
```
Topic → Researcher Agent → Writer Agent → Editor Agent → Report
```

### Example 3: E-commerce Order Processing
**Recommended: Multi-Agent with Aden**

Why: Multiple systems, needs reliability, self-improvement valuable
```
Order → Inventory Agent ─┐
                         ├──► Coordinator → Fulfillment
Payment → Finance Agent ─┘
```

### Example 4: Code Review Assistant
**Recommended: Hybrid (Aden)**

Why: Needs specialization but also coordination
```
PR → Coding Agent generates → [Security Agent, Style Agent, Logic Agent]
                           → Synthesize Review
```

---

## Migration Strategies

### Single → Multi-Agent
1. Identify natural task boundaries
2. Extract specialized agents one at a time
3. Add coordination layer
4. Implement inter-agent communication
5. Add monitoring for new failure modes

### Multi → Single-Agent
1. Consolidate related agents
2. Merge context and tools
3. Simplify coordination logic
4. Reduce LLM calls
5. Improve response latency

---

## Key Metrics to Track

| Metric | Single-Agent | Multi-Agent |
|--------|--------------|-------------|
| Latency | Lower baseline | Higher, but parallelizable |
| Cost/Request | Predictable | Variable, needs budgets |
| Success Rate | Simpler to optimize | More failure points |
| Throughput | Limited by one agent | Scales with agents |
| Debugging Time | Linear | Exponential without tooling |

---

## Conclusion

**Choose Single-Agent when:**
- Building simple, focused applications
- Latency is critical
- Budget is tight
- Quick iteration is needed

**Choose Multi-Agent when:**
- Tasks require different expertise
- Parallelism improves outcomes
- Reliability through redundancy matters
- System complexity warrants specialization

**Choose Aden's Hybrid Approach when:**
- You want multi-agent power with single-agent simplicity
- Self-improvement is valuable
- Production controls are essential
- You're scaling from prototype to production

The right architecture depends on your specific use case. Start simple, measure results, and evolve your architecture as needs become clearer.

---

*Last updated: January 2025*
