Team Composition PatternsSAFE
Multi-harness agentic plugin marketplace for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode, GitHub Copilot, Google Antigravity, and Pi
Overview
Multi-harness agentic plugin marketplace for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode, GitHub Copilot, Google Antigravity, and Pi
adb71e0b2512OBSERVED · 2026-10-02Host compatibility
What the documentation claims. We have not run a compatibility test.
| Host | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| claude-code | mentioned |
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. **EveryTrust 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.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | PASS |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | NA |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | PASS |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- none-observed
- Network
- none-observed
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (1)
CLAUDE.md
Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.
adb71e0b2512full audit observations/trust-audit/skill/wshobson__team-composition-patterns.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-02 | adb71e0b2512 | SAFE | B | 89 | first audit |
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.