No. 1
Case study · multi-agent architecture
2026
No. 1
Case study · multi-agent architecture
2026
Case study · multi-agent architecture
Five agents, one loop.
Spark plans, Pixel designs, Ledger validates, Sentinel guards, Rook ships. Here is what the loop delivered and the git trail behind it.
- Built
- Feb 2026
- Agents
- 5
- Demos
- 61
- Leads
- 50+
No. 2
Numbers · proof metrics
2026
No. 2
Numbers · proof metrics
2026
Plate 2
The numbers the loop produced
Verified through sprint dashboards
- 61
- Product demos shipped
- Brief → draft → review → ship, on a daily loop.
- 50+
- Qualified leads generated
- Pixel variants plus Ledger attribution, verified weekly.
- 5
- Specialist agents in production
- Each agent owns a bounded part of the loop.
No. 3
The loop · architecture
2026
No. 3
The loop · architecture
2026
Plate 3
Signal flows through every agent.
Each handoff has an explicit contract
Architecture diagram
Sentinel guards the loop.
Every handoff has an explicit contract. Sentinel blocks unsafe changes; Ledger validates metric integrity before Rook publishes.
Sentinel🛡️
|
Spark💡 --> Pixel🎨 --> Rook⚡
| | ^
v v |
Ledger📊 ----+---------+Agent 01 · Spark
Spark
Turns raw goals into prioritised experiments and stories.
- Input
- Lead notes, funnel gaps, and product constraints
- Output
- Sprint briefs, acceptance criteria, and test prompts
Agent 02 · Pixel
Pixel
Builds layout systems and visual variants for every campaign.
- Input
- Spark plans and positioning angles
- Output
- Landing sections, copy variants, and UI polish tickets
Agent 03 · Ledger
Ledger
Tracks impact and protects metric integrity across channels.
- Input
- Session events, CRM fields, and attribution signals
- Output
- Dashboards, alert thresholds, and quality audits
Agent 04 · Sentinel
Sentinel
Guards risk, validates assumptions, and enforces guardrails.
- Input
- Draft output from all agents
- Output
- Security checks, policy feedback, and rollback plans
Agent 05 · Rook
Rook
Executes high-leverage workflows and publishes approved changes.
- Input
- Approved tasks from Spark, Pixel, Ledger, and Sentinel
- Output
- Production deploys, campaign sends, and follow-up tasks
No. 4
Proof · git commits
2026
No. 4
Proof · git commits
2026
Plate 4
Proof — git commits
4Timestamps from the sprint branch
| Commit | Timestamp | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| 981b6837 | 2026-02-09T20:06:44+11:00 | feat(agentic-development): recover sprint proof and process narrative |
| 1982027b | 2026-02-09T20:19:00+11:00 | feat(routes): add legacy route handoff to agentic development |
| 7d085aa4 | 2026-02-10T08:15:06+11:00 | fix(seo): expand sitemap coverage and add agentic SEO plan |
| a9635d01 | 2026-02-10T09:15:16+11:00 | feat(seo): case studies + educational deep-dives — agent team, overnight builds, frameworks, tools, lifecycle |
Plate 5
Questions I got asked
FAQ
This model pairs well with the overnight build delivery rhythm and the full agentic development lifecycle.
Why run a five-agent architecture instead of one super-agent?
How is output quality kept consistent at higher velocity?
What is the fastest way to pilot this setup?
What proof data confirms these outcomes are real?
Next step
Want this for your business?
If you want this architecture adapted, I will scope a pilot and ship the first workflow in one sprint.
Thirty minutes, no pitch deck.