Repository navigation
Scoring agreement in concurrent / group-chat orchestrations with an external judge (MCP) #9572
screwtapeai
started this conversation in
Show and tell
Replies: 0 comments
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Concurrent and group-chat orchestrations give you several agent answers to the same task. A useful last step is to check whether their agreement is real (not just shared context or one agent priming the rest) before you return a result.
The judge is a remote MCP server, so in Python it plugs in with
MCPStreamableHTTPTool:Or call it directly on the collected outputs of a concurrent run:
If
false_consensus_riskcomes backhigh, a reasonable policy is to route to a fresh agent with the original evidence rather than accept the majority.Full runnable example: https://github.com/screwtapeai/screwtape-mcp-clients
Disclosure: I build Screwtape.ai. An independent judge for your agents. Screwtape isn't tied to any agent framework or AI model provider, so its verdicts are never grading their own work. Every verdict comes with a signed receipt you can verify yourself, which gives you a record you can trust when it matters.
judgeandconsensus): https://screwtape.ai/mcpreceiptobject to https://screwtape.ai/v1/receipts/verify.We're looking for a few design partners who run multi-agent orchestrations in production: 1,000 free calls a day for 60 days, plus direct input on the roadmap. Mostly I'd like to hear where this pattern breaks for you. Reply here or email screwtapedev@gmail.com.
All reactions