gemini-cli-extensions / gemini-cli-extensions/conductor

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

Open
#66 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
Python
Stars
3.7k
Forks
295
Avg merge
9m
Merged PRs (30d)
1

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.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

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.

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.

Assessment

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

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.