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 Task 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`	All tools	Code review with structured findings
`agent-teams:team-debugger`	All tools	Hypothesis-driven investigation
`agent-teams:team-implementer`	All tools	Building features within file ownership boundaries
`agent-teams:team-lead`	All 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:

Every team needs a coordinator — Either designate a team-lead or have the user coordinate directly
Match roles to agent types — Use specialized agents (reviewer, debugger, implementer) when available
Avoid duplicate roles — Two agents doing the same thing wastes resources
Define boundaries upfront — Each teammate needs clear ownership of files or responsibilities
Keep it small — 2-4 teammates is the sweet spot; 5+ requires significant coordination overhead