Atlas / Skills / wshobson / Team Composition Patterns

Team Composition PatternsSAFE

skills/wshobson/team-composition-patterns

Multi-harness agentic plugin marketplace for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode, GitHub Copilot, Google Antigravity, and Pi

Verdict
SAFE
Grade
B
Trust score
89 /100
Version
1.0.2
Hosts
1 documented
License
MIT
Stars
40,146
01

Overview

Multi-harness agentic plugin marketplace for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode, GitHub Copilot, Google Antigravity, and Pi

Read from source at commit adb71e0b2512OBSERVED · 2026-10-02
02

Host compatibility

What the documentation claims. We have not run a compatibility test.

HostStatusNotes
claude-codementioned
03

What it tells the agent

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: team-composition-patterns
description: Design optimal agent team compositions with sizing heuristics, preset configurations, and agent type selection. Use this skill when deciding how many agents to spawn for a task, when choosing between a review team versus a feature team versus a debug team, when selecting the correct subagent_type for each role to ensure agents have the tools they need, when configuring display modes (tmux, iTerm2, in-process) for a CI or local environment, or when building a custom team composition for a non-standard workflow such as a migration or security audit.
version: 1.0.2
---

# Team Composition Patterns

Best practices for composing multi-agent teams, selecting team sizes, choosing agent types, and configuring display modes for Claude Code's Agent Teams feature.

## When to Use This Skill

- Deciding how many teammates to spawn for a task
- Choosing between preset team configurations
- Selecting the right agent type (subagent_type) for each role
- Configuring teammate display modes (tmux, iTerm2, in-process)
- Building custom team compositions for non-standard workflows

## Team Sizing Heuristics

| Complexity   | Team Size | When to Use                                                 |
| ------------ | --------- | ----------------------------------------------------------- |
| Simple       | 1-2       | Single-dimension review, isolated bug, small feature        |
| Moderate     | 2-3       | Multi-file changes, 2-3 concerns, medium features           |
| Complex      | 3-4       | Cross-cutting concerns, large features, deep debugging      |
| Very Complex | 4-5       | Full-stack features, comprehensive reviews, systemic issues |

**Rule of thumb**: Start with the smallest team that covers all required dimensions. Adding teammates increases coordination overhead.

## Preset Team Compositions

### Review Team

- **Size**: 3 reviewers
- **Agents**: 3x `team-reviewer`
- **Default dimensions**: security, performance, architecture
- **Use when**: Code changes need multi-dimensional quality assessment

### Debug Team

- **Size**: 3 investigators
- **Agents**: 3x `team-debugger`
- **Default hypotheses**: 3 competing hypotheses
- **Use when**: Bug has multiple plausible root causes

### Feature Team

- **Size**: 3 (1 lead + 2 implementers)
- **Agents**: 1x `team-lead` + 2x `team-implementer`
- **Use when**: Feature can be decomposed into parallel work streams

### Fullstack Team

- **Size**: 4 (1 lead + 3 implementers)
- **Agents**: 1x `team-lead` + 1x frontend `team-implementer` + 1x backend `team-implementer` + 1x test `team-implementer`
- **Use when**: Feature spans frontend, backend, and test layers

### Research Team

- **Size**: 3 researchers
- **Agents**: 3x `general-purpose`
- **Default areas**: Each assigned a different research question, module, or topic
- **Capabilities**: Codebase search (Grep, Glob, Read), web search (WebSearch, WebFetch)
- **Use when**: Need to understand a codebase, research libraries, compare approaches, or gather information from code and web sources in parallel

### Security Team

- **Size**: 4 reviewers
- **Agents**: 4x `team-reviewer`
- **Default dimensions**: OWASP/vulnerabilities, auth/access control, dependencies/supply chain, secrets/configuration
- **Use when**: Comprehensive security audit covering multiple attack surfaces

### Migration Team

- **Size**: 4 (1 lead + 2 implementers + 1 reviewer)
- **Agents**: 1x `team-lead` + 2x `team-implementer` + 1x `team-reviewer`
- **Use when**: Large codebase migration (framework upgrade, language port, API version bump) requiring parallel work with correctness verification

## Agent Type Selection

When spawning teammates with the `Agent` tool, choose `subagent_type` based on what tools the teammate needs:

| Agent Type                     | Tools Available                                      | Use For                                                    |
| ------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- |
| `general-purpose`              | All tools (Read, Write, Edit, Bash, etc.)            | Implementation, debugging, any task requiring file changes |
| `Explore`                      | Read-only tools (Read, Grep, Glob)                   | Research, code exploration, analysis                       |
| `Plan`                         | Read-only tools                                      | Architecture planning, task decomposition                  |
| `agent-teams:team-reviewer`    | Read/search/Bash plus TaskList/TaskGet/TaskUpdate/SendMessage | Code review with structured findings               |
| `agent-teams:team-debugger`    | Read/search/Bash plus TaskList/TaskGet/TaskUpdate/SendMessage | Hypothesis-driven investigation                    |
| `agent-teams:team-implementer` | Read/Write/Edit/search/Bash plus TaskList/TaskGet/TaskUpdate/SendMessage | Building features within file ownership boundaries |
| `agent-teams:team-lead`        | Read/search/Bash plus Agent Teams coordination tools | Team orchestration and coordination                        |

**Key distinction**: Read-only agents (Explore, Plan) cannot modify files. Never assign implementation tasks to read-only agents.

## Display Mode Configuration

Configure in `~/.claude/settings.json`:

```json
{
  "teammateMode": "tmux"
}
```

| Mode           | Behavior                       | Best For                                          |
| -------------- | ------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------- |
| `"tmux"`       | Each teammate in a tmux pane   | Development workflows, monitoring multiple agents |
| `"iterm2"`     | Each teammate in an iTerm2 tab | macOS users who prefer iTerm2                     |
| `"in-process"` | All teammates in same process  | Simple tasks, CI/CD environments                  |

## Custom Team Guidelines

When building custom teams:

1. **Every
04

Trust audit

SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.

LayerWhat it checksResult
L0Provenance & inventoryPASS
L1Static analysis of the codeNA
L2Instruction surface (what it tells the agent)PASS
L3Class-specific surfacePASS
L4Behavioural (sandbox)SKIPPED

What the source does

Filesystem
none-observed
Network
none-observed
Shell
none-observed
Dependencies
pinned
Secrets in source
none-found

Findings (1)

LOWInventory / provenance · inv.symlink · CWE-1104
CLAUDE.md
CLAUDE.md
Why it matters. link not followed

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.

Audited 2026-10-02 · audit v0.4.1 · source sha adb71e0b2512full audit observations/trust-audit/skill/wshobson__team-composition-patterns.json · Report an issue / request a re-scan
05

Audit history

Every audit this skill has had.

DateSourceVerdictGradeScoreChange
2026-10-02adb71e0b2512SAFEB89first audit
06

Questions

What does the Team Composition Patterns skill do?

Multi-harness agentic plugin marketplace for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode, GitHub Copilot, Google Antigravity, and Pi

Is Team Composition Patterns safe to install?

The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.

What can Team Composition Patterns access on my machine?

The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.

Which assistants does Team Composition Patterns work with?

Its documentation mentions claude-code. That is what the text claims, not a compatibility test we ran.

How current is this page?

The grade is for one exact copy of the source (adb71e0b2512), read on 2026-10-02. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.

Advertisement