Grok Bot teams are built for parallel work. Here is the exact setup that makes 6 bots run 2.4x faster than one.
One line: researcher → writer → reviewer. Each waits for the one before, so six bots in a row run as fast as one.
Parallel: inbox triage, calendar check and competitor page run at once, then one bot merges them into a morning brief. (2.4x is 6 bots with 70% of the work independent.)
step 1 → Draw the arrows before you create a bot. For every "and then", ask: does this step need the last one's output? Yes is a real arrow. No means those two steps can run together.
step 2 → Build around parallel work. Split the job into inputs that don't need each other, then give one bot the job of merging them.
step 3 → One owner per stage. The docs say it themselves: "Ask for a single owner at each stage." Without one, parallel handoffs make duplicate work.
step 4 → Every bot earns its place: its own schedule, a check of work it didn't do, narrow memory, or real parallel work. No reason, no bot.
step 5 → The reviewer lives in its own conversation. It gets the artifact, the source and the criteria, never the thread. Fresh eyes every time.
step 6 → Pass paths, not piles. Each bot saves a 15-line summary to a shared file and hands off with one message: task id, file path, what it needs back.
step 7 → Cap every chain. 6 handoffs per task. Stop after 2 rounds in a row with no progress. Write both rules into every bot's description.
step 8 → Log every handoff to one file and run a 43-line script on a schedule that flags runaway chains. A loop can't hide anymore.
step 9 → Plan the night. Background approvals expire after about 10 minutes, so every overnight chain ends in an action you allowed in advance or a draft saved in a file. You review in the morning. The team never stalls.
step 10 → Audit the whole team from a model outside it. It marks the fake arrows and the bots that should merge. One check, and the team is tighter.
Same bots. Different arrows.
Official Anthropic tip for Claude Code: Opus 5.5 advises. Sonnet 5.5 builds. Haiku 5.5 investigates
turn Claude Code into your own 3-model engineering team
01 Sonnet 5.5 → the builder
turns findings into code changes, runs tests, and owns implementation
02 Opus 5.5 → the advisor
reviews the approach when a decision needs another pass
03 Haiku 5.5 → the research crew
maps the codebase, finds relevant files, and returns useful evidence
the clever part:
scouts research in separate contexts and bring back findings for the main agent to act on
create custom Haiku scouts with:
model: haiku
tools: Read, Grep, Glob
that tool list gives them read-and-search access
↳ [subagent setup]
↳ https://t.co/HI76SvzP47
with Sonnet as your main model, enable Opus advice:
/advisor opus
the advisor is experimental and uses the Anthropic API
↳ [advisor setup]
↳ https://t.co/GltC9JBgWH
add the optional community hooks:
npx claude-code-templates@latest --setting hooks/subagents-explore-only --hook security/subagent-read-only-guard
SubagentStart → adds research instructions. [instruction hook]
↳ https://t.co/wnDZe39lTG
PreToolUse → blocks covered subagent write attempts. [guard hook]
↳ https://t.co/vnC1Ql0Yqr
keep the tool allowlist and verify the guard runs; MCP calls are outside its coverage
the goal:
dedicated researchers, useful advice, and a main agent that owns the code changes
the loop:
ask → read → search → report → main agent edits → tests
save this, then read the full guide for Opus 5.5 Harness Engineering
THIS IS ACTUAL F*CKING GOLD
Anthropic just quietly dropped one of the best setups for Claude Code
The rule: orchestrate Sonnet, Haiku and Opus 5.5 simultaneously, locking every model into the exact lane it dominates
Opus-grade intelligence on critical architectural calls, zero Opus burn on routine terminal iterations
Launch Claude Code with this flag pair:
claude --model sonnet --advisor opus
how the workload divides:
→ Sonnet 5.5 leads the main session and cuts the actual code
→ Haiku 5.5 swarms repos, greps call sites, and parses docs concurrently
→ Opus 5.5 remains on standby as advisor for high-leverage checkpoints
→ you eliminate token waste on work that never required frontier reasoning
Opus only gets triggered on three specific events:
→ right before locking an architectural plan
→ the second an identical error hits twice
→ right before marking a complex task complete
Sonnet builds · Haiku explores · Opus reviews
JEV engineering applies the exact same logic one layer deeper: deterministic branches (file selection, tool dispatch, fast retry vs abort) clear in sub-milliseconds, so the frontier models only handle genuine forks
the architecture tree:
> Sonnet 5.5 drives the primary terminal session and edits code
> search crawls repo structure on Haiku 5.5
> grep locates call signatures on Haiku 5.5
> docs fetches API specs and schemas on Haiku 5.5
> Opus 5.5 stands on call as advisor, ingesting full context when pinged
> JEV resolves instant deterministic routing
feed this tree and prompt directly into Claude Code ↓
"Configure my Claude Code environment around this multi-model tree:
1. Run the primary session on Sonnet 5.5 with Opus 5.5 as advisor
2. Spawn three read-only Haiku 5.5 subagents: search (repo mapping), grep (call sites), docs (API references)
3. Enforce one rule in CLAUDE.md: ping advisor before locking any plan, upon repeating any error twice, and before final task handoff
4. Route instantaneous deterministic forks (tool choice, path check, retries) through JEV
Show every file update as a diff first, make zero changes without confirmation"
↳ https://t.co/gvAWk6JDNP
bookmark this, you'll run it every single day