Hacktoberfest 2026: the issues maintainers tagged for October, open and beginner-friendly. Browse Hacktoberfest issues

Proposal: Multi-Agent Parallelism for Conductor (Seeking Testers & Feedback)

Open
  • Is something wrong?
#66 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Newbie friendliness
25/100
Issue type
Feature
Clarity
Needs clarification
Activity status
Stale
Tech stack
python
Domain
cli, devtools

Research direction

Start by reading the discussion in issue #55 and the linked Conductor-Worktree reference implementation. Exercise the proposed Sync Gates, Write-Lock sandbox, and /wt:merge workflow across dependency chains and shared-file cases; done means reporting reproducible failures, edge cases, and feedback on the merge heuristic.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

Following the discussion in #55, I have developed and tested a reference implementation for a Parallel Orchestration Layer for Conductor. This system allows two agents (Agent A: Core/Provider and Agent B: Feature/Consumer) to work simultaneously in isolated environments.

The Problem
As noted in #55, a serial workflow limits velocity. However, moving to worktrees introduces:

Registry Synchronization: How does the main branch track progress happening on divergent branches?

Context Corruption: How do we prevent agents from overwriting each other's files or corrupting local environments (e.g., .venv)?

https://github.com/[MohamedHamed19m/Conductor-Worktree](https://github.com/MohamedHamed19m/Conductor-Worktree)

The Proposed Solution (The "Hybrid" Model)
I have implemented a set of commands that wrap the existing Conductor protocol to manage these risks:

  1. Role-Based Partitioning
    The "Lead Architect" persona ensures that the plan.md is partitioned by domain:

Agent A (Core): Foundational APIs, schemas, and internal logic.

Agent B (Feature): UI, CLI, and integration layers.

  1. Behavioral "Sandbox" Mode
    A dedicated worker command (acting as a guardrail) enforces Write-Locks. Agents are permitted to read all files but are technically restricted from writing to files owned by their sibling or the conductor/ metadata directly.

  2. Automated Sync & Merge
    To handle dependencies (e.g., Agent B needing an API Agent A just finished), I use Sync Gates. The merge command then reconciles the divergent implementation branches and updates the master tracks.md status.

I am looking for early adopters and contributors to help refine this workflow. Specifically, I am seeking feedback on:

Stress Testing the "Sync Gates": Does the Mid-Implementation Merge Logic Hold Up in Complex Dependency Chains?

Sandbox Edge Cases: Are there specific file types or directory structures where the current "Write-Lock" logic needs more granular control?

Improving the /wt:merge heuristic: Refining how the Lead Merge persona handles shared file overlaps and duplicate logic detection.

Dominant language
Python
Stars
3.7k
Forks
297
Avg merge
9m
Merged PRs (30d)
1

Getting set up

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from gemini-cli-extensions/conductor

All issues in gemini-cli-extensions/conductor

Similar issues

More Python issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.