Vat Example Cat Agents

VAT Example Cat Agents

Comprehensive orchestration guide for Claude Code using the vat-example-cat-agents toolkit.

Purpose: For Claude Code, Not the LLM

Key distinction:

• This file = Guidance for Claude Code (how to orchestrate agents)
• Agent resources = Content for the LLM (what to say/know)

This skill references agent resources via markdown links but doesn't duplicate LLM prompts.

Agent Inventory

The vat-example-cat-agents package provides 8 agents across 4 archetypes:

Pure Function Tools (2 agents)

• haiku-validator - Validates 5-7-5 syllable structure + kigo/kireji
• name-validator - Quirky characteristic-based validation

One-Shot LLM Analyzers (4 agents)

• photo-analyzer - Vision LLM extracts characteristics from images
• description-parser - Text parsing extracts characteristics from descriptions
• name-generator - Creates characteristic-based cat names
• haiku-generator - Composes haikus about cats

Conversational Assistant (1 agent)

• breed-advisor - Multi-turn breed selection through natural dialogue

External Event Integrator (1 agent)

• human-approval - HITL approval gate (mockable)

When to Use This Skill

Trigger this skill when:

• User wants help selecting a cat breed
• User has a cat photo and wants analysis
• User needs a cat name suggestion
• User wants a haiku about their cat
• User needs validation of generated content (names, haikus)
• User wants to combine multiple agents in a workflow

High-Level Orchestration Patterns

Pattern 1: Single Agent (Simple)

Use when user has a straightforward request that maps to one agent.

Example workflows:

• "What cat breed should I get?" → breed-advisor
• "Analyze this cat photo" → photo-analyzer
• "Is this a valid haiku?" → haiku-validator (pure function)

Pattern 2: Sequential Pipeline (Multi-Agent)

Use when output of one agent feeds into another.

Example workflows:

1. Photo → Characteristics → Name
   • photo-analyzer → name-generator
2. Photo → Characteristics → Haiku
   • photo-analyzer → haiku-generator
3. Description → Characteristics → Name → Validation
   • description-parser → name-generator → name-validator

Pattern 3: Generate-Validate Loop (Iterative)

Use when generator produces content that needs validation with retry logic.

Example workflows:

1. Name generation with validation
   • Generate → Validate → If invalid, retry with feedback
   • Uses: name-generator + name-validator
2. Haiku generation with validation
   • Generate → Validate → If invalid, retry
   • Uses: haiku-generator + haiku-validator

Orchestration tip: Generator agents have NO knowledge of validation rules. This is intentional - forces iteration and tests feedback loops.

Pattern 4: HITL Approval Gate (External Event)

Use when decision requires human judgment.

Example workflows:

1. Breed application approval
   • Gather info → Generate application → human-approval → Process result
2. Name approval before finalization
   • Generate names → Present options → Human selects → Finalize

Detailed Workflow Orchestration

Workflow A: Breed Selection (Conversational)

When: User wants help finding the right cat breed.

Agent: breed-advisor

Orchestration strategy:

1. Phase 1 - Gathering (see Conversation Strategy)

   • Collect ≥4 factors including music preference
   • ONE question at a time (don't bombard)
   • Extract factors after each turn
   • Monitor readiness: factorsCollected >= 4 && musicPreference != null

2. Phase 2 - Recommendation

   • Present 3-5 matched breeds
   • Allow exploration, questions, comparisons
   • Use conversational formatting (not data dump)

3. Phase 3 - Selection

   • Detect selection signals ("I'll take", "sounds good")
   • Conclude gracefully
   • Provide next steps or exit instruction

Critical factor: Music preference is the PRIMARY compatibility factor. Ask early, use as conversation anchor. See Music Preference Insight for mappings.

Reference implementation: See cat-breed-selection.md for detailed breed selection orchestration.

Workflow B: Photo Analysis Pipeline

When: User provides a cat photo and wants analysis, name, or haiku.

Agents: photo-analyzer → name-generator OR haiku-generator

Orchestration strategy:

Step 1: Analyze Photo
- Input: Image path/URL
- Agent: photo-analyzer
- Output: CatCharacteristics
- Note: Supports mock mode (reads EXIF) for testing

Step 2: Generate Content
- Input: CatCharacteristics from Step 1
- Agent: name-generator OR haiku-generator
- Output: NameSuggestion OR Haiku

Optional Step 3: Validate
- Input: Generated content + original characteristics
- Agent: name-validator OR haiku-validator (pure functions)
- Output: Validation result
- If invalid: Retry Step 2 with feedback

Mockable behavior: photo-analyzer reads EXIF metadata in mock mode. For production, set mockable: false to use real vision API.

Workflow C: Text Description Pipeline

When: User describes a cat in text (no photo).

Agents: description-parser → name-generator OR haiku-generator

Orchestration strategy:

Step 1: Parse Description
- Input: Text description
- Agent: description-parser
- Output: CatCharacteristics (same schema as photo-analyzer!)

Step 2-3: Same as Workflow B
- Multi-modal convergence: photo and text produce same schema
- Downstream agents (name-gen, haiku-gen) work with either

Key insight: Photo and text paths converge at CatCharacteristics schema. This enables multi-modal workflows without agent changes.

Workflow D: Generate-Validate-Retry Loop

When: Generator produces content that must pass validation rules.

Pattern: Generator (LLM) + Validator (pure function) + Retry logic

Implementation:

// Pseudo-code for orchestration
let attempts = 0;
const maxAttempts = 3;

while (attempts < maxAttempts) {
  // Generate content
  const suggestion = await generator(characteristics);

  // Validate (pure function, instant)
  const validation = validator(suggestion, characteristics);

  if (validation.status === 'valid') {
    return suggestion; // Success!
  }

  // Retry with feedback
  attempts++;
  // Optional: Adjust approach based on validation.reason
}

throw new Error('Could not generate valid content after 3 attempts');

Why this pattern works:

• Generator has NO knowledge of validation rules (isolated concerns)
• Validator is deterministic (pure function, fast)
• Feedback loop tests multi-turn orchestration
• ~60-70% initial rejection rate forces iteration

Agents using this pattern:

• name-generator + name-validator
• haiku-generator + haiku-validator

Workflow E: HITL Approval Gate

When: Decision requires human judgment (compliance, taste, ethics).

Agent: human-approval

Orchestration strategy:

Step 1: Prepare Request
- Gather all necessary context
- Format clearly for human reviewer
- Include relevant data (characteristics, generated content, reasoning)

Step 2: Emit Approval Request
- Agent: human-approval
- Input: Request payload
- Behavior: Blocks waiting for response
- Timeout: Configurable (default: 60s)

Step 3: Handle Response
- Approved: Continue workflow
- Rejected: Handle gracefully (retry, inform user, etc.)
- Timeout: Fall back to safe default or escalate

Mockable behavior: Set mockable: true to auto-approve without human (useful for testing).

Real-world uses:

• Breeding application approval
• Name selection from alternatives
• Content moderation decisions

CLI Exposure for Pure Functions

Pure function tools (validators) can be exposed via CLI for direct invocation.

Usage Pattern

# Pass JSON input, get JSON/YAML output
echo '{"name": "Mr. Whiskers", "characteristics": {...}}' | vat agents validate-name

# Output format (using 2>&1):
# [stdout - complete output]
# ---
# [stderr - error messages]

Implementation Requirements

1. Input: JSON on stdin
2. Output: JSON or YAML on stdout (complete, flushed)
3. Errors: stderr (separated with --- when using 2>&1)
4. Exit codes: 0 = success, 1 = validation failure, 2 = error

Sequence Example

[Start]
↓
Read stdin (JSON input)
↓
Parse and validate input schema
↓
Execute pure function
↓
Flush stdout with complete result
↓
Print "---" separator
↓
Flush stderr with any error messages
↓
Exit with appropriate code

Benefits

• MCP can map to CLI calls (fast, stateless)
• No long-running processes for pure functions
• Clear separation of output vs errors
• Composable with other CLI tools

Applicable Agents

• name-validator - vat agents validate-name
• haiku-validator - vat agents validate-haiku
• Future: Any pure function tool

What Claude Code Does vs What Agents Do

Claude Code's Role (This Skill):

Orchestration:

• Select which agent(s) to use
• Chain agents in workflows (pipelines)
• Manage state between agents (pass outputs as inputs)
• Handle retries and error recovery

Monitoring:

• Track conversation phase (gathering, recommendation, selection)
• Count validation attempts (retry limits)
• Detect completion signals (phase transitions)
• Monitor timeouts (HITL approvals)

Decision Making:

• When to transition between phases
• When to retry vs give up
• Which agent path to take (photo vs text)
• How to present results to user

Agents' Role (Agent Resources):

Pure Functions:

• Execute deterministic logic (validation rules)
• Return results instantly
• No side effects, no state

LLM Analyzers:

• Extract structured data from unstructured input
• Apply domain knowledge to classification
• Generate creative content (names, haikus)

Conversational Assistants:

• Conduct natural dialogue
• Accumulate context over turns
• Make recommendations based on collected factors

Event Integrators:

• Emit events to external systems
• Block waiting for responses
• Handle timeouts and errors

Key insight: Agents are specialized, focused on their domain. Claude Code provides the glue, orchestration, and workflow logic.

Content Separation Guidelines

What Belongs in Agent Resources (LLM-Facing):

✅ System prompts and LLM instructions ✅ Domain knowledge (breed database, syllable counting rules, kigo lists) ✅ Extraction formats (JSON schemas, output templates) ✅ Examples for few-shot learning ✅ Natural language mappings ✅ Validation rules and constraints

Location: resources/agents/*.md

What Belongs in Skills (Claude Code-Facing):

✅ When to trigger agents (user intent signals) ✅ How to chain agents (workflow patterns) ✅ What to monitor (readiness criteria, retry limits) ✅ Debugging guidance (common issues, pitfalls) ✅ Meta-strategy (why photo first, when to retry) ✅ CLI exposure patterns

Location: resources/skills/*.md (this file)

Overlap (Reference, Don't Duplicate):

⚠️ Workflow structure (skill explains orchestration, agent implements) ⚠️ Phase transitions (skill monitors, agent executes) ⚠️ Validation criteria (skill manages retries, agent defines rules)

Resolution: Keep agent resources authoritative. Skills REFERENCE via links, don't duplicate.

Common Pitfalls

❌ Don't: Call Agents Without Understanding Their Archetype

Each archetype has different behavior:

• Pure functions: Instant, deterministic
• LLM analyzers: Single call, non-deterministic
• Conversational: Multi-turn, stateful
• Event integrators: Blocking, timeout handling

✅ Do: Match Orchestration to Archetype

Pure function → Call directly, no retry needed
LLM analyzer → Call once, parse result
Conversational → Multi-turn loop with state
Event integrator → Emit, wait, handle timeout

❌ Don't: Skip Validation in Generate-Validate Loops

Validators exist for a reason. Don't bypass them or assume LLM output is always valid.

✅ Do: Embrace the Feedback Loop

Generate → Validate → If invalid, retry with feedback

This pattern tests real-world orchestration where first attempts often fail.

❌ Don't: Mix Mock and Production Modes Accidentally

Mock mode (EXIF metadata) is fast and free. Production mode (real APIs) is slow and expensive. Be explicit about which mode you're using.

✅ Do: Use Mock Mode for Development, Production for Deployment

// Development/testing
const result = await analyzePhoto(path, { mockable: true });

// Production
const result = await analyzePhoto(path, { mockable: false });

❌ Don't: Bombard Users with Questions in Conversational Flows

One question at a time. Give users space to think and respond naturally.

✅ Do: Guide Conversation Gently

Bad: "Tell me your music, living space, activity level, grooming, family, and allergies"
Good: "What's your favorite type of music?" → [response] → "Great! Tell me about your living space..."

Debugging: When Things Go Wrong

Issue: Photo Analysis Fails

Symptoms: Vision API errors, unexpected characteristics

Debug steps:

1. Check if image path is valid
2. Verify image is actually a photo (not text, PDF, etc.)
3. Try mock mode first: { mockable: true }
4. Check API key and rate limits for production mode
5. Verify EXIF metadata format if using mock mode

Issue: Name Validation Always Fails

Symptoms: Name generator can't produce valid names after 3+ attempts

Debug steps:

1. Check validation rules: name-validator has quirky requirements
2. Review characteristics: Validation rules depend on cat traits
3. Verify characteristics schema: All required fields present?
4. Check feedback loop: Is validation.reason being used for retries?

Common cause: ~60-70% rejection rate is EXPECTED. This forces iteration and tests feedback loops.

Issue: Haiku Validation Rejects Everything

Symptoms: Haiku generator struggles to meet 5-7-5 syllable structure

Debug steps:

1. Check syllable counting algorithm: May differ from LLM's internal counting
2. Verify kigo (seasonal word) presence: Required for valid haiku
3. Check kireji (cutting word) detection: Optional but improves score
4. Review haiku format: Must be exactly 3 lines

Solution: Allow multiple retry attempts (3-5). Haiku generation is hard.

Issue: Conversation Stalls in Breed Selection

Symptoms: Agent doesn't transition to recommendations

Debug steps:

1. Check factor count: Need ≥4 factors collected
2. Verify music preference: REQUIRED for transition
3. Review conversation history: Are factors being extracted?
4. Check readiness criteria: Session state vs actual factors

Solution: Ensure extraction happens after each turn. Monitor factorsCollected metadata.

Issue: HITL Approval Times Out

Symptoms: human-approval agent returns timeout status

Debug steps:

1. Check timeout value: Default 60s, may need adjustment
2. Verify event emission: Is request actually sent?
3. Check mock mode: Set mockable: true for testing
4. Review request format: Is it clear what needs approval?

Solution: For testing, use mock mode. For production, increase timeout or add retry logic.

Agent Resource Links

Pure Function Tools

• name-validator (no agent resource - pure TypeScript logic)
• haiku-validator (no agent resource - pure TypeScript logic)

One-Shot LLM Analyzers

• Photo Analyzer - Vision analysis
• Description Parser - Text parsing
• Name Generator - Creative naming
• Haiku Generator - Haiku composition

Conversational Assistant

• Breed Advisor - Multi-turn breed selection
  • Welcome Message
  • Music Preference Insight
  • Factor Definitions
  • Conversation Strategy
  • Factor Extraction Prompt
  • Transition Message
  • Recommendation Presentation
  • Selection Extraction
  • Conclusion Prompt

External Event Integrator

• Human Approval - HITL approval gate

Related Documentation

• Cat Breed Selection Skill - Detailed breed advisor orchestration
• Package README - Human-facing documentation
• Package Structure - Technical organization

Success Criteria

Your orchestration is successful when:

For Single Agents:

• Agent called with valid input schema
• Output parsed and validated correctly
• Errors handled gracefully
• User receives clear, actionable results

For Pipelines:

• Data flows correctly between agents
• Schema compatibility maintained (CatCharacteristics convergence)
• Intermediate results stored appropriately
• Final output meets user's original intent

For Loops:

• Retry logic prevents infinite loops (max attempts)
• Feedback improves subsequent generations
• User informed of progress ("Generating... Attempt 2 of 3")
• Success achieved within reasonable attempts

For Conversational Flows:

• User feels heard, not interrogated
• Natural dialogue rhythm maintained
• Factors collected efficiently (4-6 turns typical)
• Recommendations feel personalized
• Selection confirmed clearly

For HITL Workflows:

• Request clearly formatted for human reviewer
• Timeout handling prevents indefinite blocking
• Approval/rejection handled appropriately
• User understands what happened

Advanced Orchestration Patterns

Pattern: Parallel Execution

When agents don't depend on each other, run them in parallel.

Example: Generate both name and haiku from same characteristics

const [name, haiku] = await Promise.all([
  generateCatName(characteristics),
  generateCatHaiku(characteristics),
]);

Benefits: Faster execution, better user experience

Pattern: Fallback Chain

When one agent fails, try alternatives.

Example: Photo analysis with text description fallback

let characteristics;
try {
  characteristics = await analyzePhoto(imagePath);
} catch {
  // Fallback to text description
  const description = await getUserDescription();
  characteristics = await parseDescription(description);
}

Benefits: Resilience, better error handling

Pattern: Conditional Routing

Choose agent path based on user input type.

Example: Multi-modal input handling

if (input.type === 'image') {
  characteristics = await analyzePhoto(input.imagePath);
} else if (input.type === 'text') {
  characteristics = await parseDescription(input.description);
} else {
  // Conversational gathering
  characteristics = await breedAdvisor.gather();
}

Benefits: Flexible input handling, better UX

Pattern: Staged Approval

Break complex workflows into approval stages.

Example: Multi-stage breeding application

// Stage 1: Basic info approval
const basicApproval = await humanApproval({ stage: 'basic', data });
if (!basicApproval.approved) return;

// Stage 2: Detailed questionnaire
const detailApproval = await humanApproval({ stage: 'detail', data });
if (!detailApproval.approved) return;

// Stage 3: Final review
const finalApproval = await humanApproval({ stage: 'final', data });

Benefits: Checkpoints prevent wasted work, clearer decision points

CLI Integration Examples

Example 1: Validate Name via CLI

# Input
echo '{
  "name": "Mr. Whiskers",
  "characteristics": {
    "physical": {
      "furColor": "Orange",
      "furPattern": "Tabby",
      "size": "medium"
    },
    "behavioral": {
      "personality": ["Playful", "Curious"]
    }
  }
}' | vat agents validate-name

# Output (stdout)
{
  "status": "valid",
  "reason": "Name meets all quirky validation rules",
  "confidence": 0.95
}
---
# (stderr - empty if no errors)

Example 2: Validate Haiku via CLI

# Input
echo '{
  "lines": [
    "Orange sunset fur",
    "Paws dance across the tatami",
    "Zen master purrs"
  ]
}' | vat agents validate-haiku

# Output (stdout)
{
  "status": "valid",
  "syllableCounts": [5, 7, 5],
  "hasKigo": true,
  "kigo": "sunset",
  "hasKireji": false,
  "errors": []
}
---
# (stderr - empty if no errors)

Example 3: Error Handling

# Invalid input
echo '{"invalid": "schema"}' | vat agents validate-name

# Output
# (stdout - empty)
---
Error: Invalid input schema. Expected 'name' and 'characteristics' fields.
Schema validation failed:
  - Missing required field: name
  - Missing required field: characteristics
# (exit code: 2)

Next Steps

Once you've successfully orchestrated agents:

1. Explore Combinations - Try chaining agents in new ways
2. Add Custom Validation - Create your own quirky validation rules
3. Build New Workflows - Combine agents for complex use cases
4. Contribute Patterns - Share successful orchestration strategies
5. Package Skills - Create distributable skill packages with pure functions

Questions?

• For orchestration patterns: This file (SKILL.md)
• For agent-specific details: See individual agent resources
• For implementation examples: See examples/ directory
• For archetype theory: See package README.md