<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Single-agent or Multi-agent Systems? Why Not Both? · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2505.18286/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2505.18286/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Single-agent or Multi-agent Systems? Why Not Both? — mentioned by joshuaisaact</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46753582</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2505.18286:46753582</guid><pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2026 12:36:15 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Fair push back. The distinction I&amp;#x27;m drawing is between: A. Using a role prompt to configure a single function&amp;#x27;s scope (&amp;quot;you are a code reviewer, focus on X&amp;quot;) - totally reasonable, leverages training B. Building an elaborate multi-agent orchestration layer with hand-offs, coordination protocols, and framework abstractions on top of that I&amp;#x27;m not arguing against A. I&amp;#x27;m arguing that B often adds complexity without proportional benefit, especially as models get better at long-context reasoning. Fairly recent research (arXiv May 2025: &amp;quot;Single-agent or Multi-agent Systems?&amp;quot;…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2505.18286/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.MA</category></item></channel></rss>
