Tailwind Traders is implementing multi-agent orchestration for order troubleshooting. A central coordinator must assign work to inventory, shipping, and billing specialist agents and merge results for the customer. Which orchestration pattern should you implement?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
D is hub-and-spoke / orchestrator-subagent—the pattern that fits a coordinator plus specialists. The hub routes, aggregates, and owns the user response path; spokes stay scoped. A loses coordination. B forces a rigid sequence that may waste steps. C collapses isolation and tool boundaries. AI-500 expects you to implement patterns like hub-and-spoke, sequential, parallel, peer-to-peer, and orchestrator-subagent deliberately based on workflow shape.
Full Explanation
D is correct because multi-agent orchestration patterns include hub-and-spoke and orchestrator-subagent designs where a coordinator delegates to specialists and merges results. That matches order troubleshooting with inventory, shipping, and billing skills. A is incorrect: pure disconnection prevents consistent customer resolution. B is incorrect: a fixed sequence is a different pattern and may be inefficient for issue-dependent routing. C is incorrect: one model role-playing specialists is not true multi-agent tool isolation. Choose hub-and-spoke when centralized policy, routing, and aggregation are required.