Speckit and Multi Agent Orchestration #1077
Replies: 3 comments
-
|
Hey @vessel-one, thanks for sharing! Im experimenting with SpecKit, was wondering where do you fit the testing phase? Do you include it when you run the plan command? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@vessel-one Have you considered adding extensions or presets so others can benefit from it? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hi all, at the speed AI is running, we now run claude code with the super powers plugin, its second to none, we almost get no re work , so long as the prd is spec'd and architected correctly. Using subagents starting with opus at top level, down to sonnet sub agent on execution. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi everyone,
Is anyone else experimenting with multi-agent workflows using GitHub Copilot, SpecKit, and VS Code?
I’ve been getting decent results so far — mainly by leveraging SpecKit for structure up until the task stage. Before implementation, I ask Sonnet 4.5 to enable multi-agent workflows through chat. It then rebuilds the tasks, assigns each to specific agents, and generates an agent-coordination.json file that defines priorities, parallel and blocking tasks — ensuring agents don’t overlap or start prematurely.
From there, I open several chat windows and use the prompts Sonnet 4.5 provides for each agent. Haiku 4.5 handles execution, and the results have been surprisingly good. Once the other agents finish, I get Sonnet 4.5 to review their output and provide the next set of instructions. It feels like this process could be integrated directly into SpecKit with a /command for smoother coordination.
With all the hype (and skepticism) around AI right now, we’re actually seeing strong, measurable results from SpecKit. We only implement small, incremental features at a time and slightly adjust the development flow — asking it to build tests, build feature tests, repair, build, test, repair rather than leaving testing until the end. This approach seems to catch about 98 % of errors, leaving only minor bugs.
Overall, results have been solid once you understand its limits — but I’m curious how others are approaching this.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions