Agent orchestration
Coordinating which agent or tool acts, in what order, with what context — routing tasks, merging results, retrying failures and enforcing gates. Orchestration turns capable-but-isolated models into a system.
What orchestration actually decides
Which agent or tool acts, in what order, with what context, and what happens when a step fails. Those four decisions are the difference between a collection of capable components and a system. Most disappointing agent deployments have good models and no orchestration layer worth the name.
Routing, retries and gates
A real orchestrator routes work by task type, merges results from parallel branches, retries transient failures without repeating side effects, and enforces approval gates before consequential actions. None of that is glamorous. All of it is what makes the difference between a demo and an operation.
Keeping work attributable
Once several agents and tools touch a task, "what happened" becomes genuinely hard to answer unless the orchestrator records it. Attribution — this claim came from that source, this write followed that approval — has to be built into the routing layer, because it cannot be reconstructed afterwards.
In AGNT
The AGNT orchestrator routes work across agents, workflows and tools while keeping every step attributable.
Agent orchestration — common questions
Is an orchestrator just a workflow engine?
It is a workflow engine that also decides — routing dynamically based on what the work turns out to be, rather than following a path fixed at design time.
What happens when an orchestrated step fails?
A well-built orchestrator distinguishes transient failures worth retrying from real ones worth escalating, and never silently continues with a missing result.
Does orchestration slow things down?
Coordination costs something, but it usually buys more than it spends: parallel branches for independent work, and no wasted downstream effort built on a failed upstream step.