A team must ship a risky orchestrator prompt change that alters how three specialist agents are sequenced. Automated evals look good in staging. They need a production release method that limits blast radius if live behavior diverges. Which release methodology best fits?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
The correct answer is B. Canary is built for risky orchestration changes: tiny live slice, watch quality and errors, expand or roll back. Big-bang midnight swaps maximize blast radius. Zip-to-IT is not cloud release management. Turning monitoring off during deploy is how you miss the failure.
Full Explanation
Option B is correct. Deploy skills for multi-agent solutions include canary (and related progressive) releases with monitoring and rollback. Routing a small live percentage validates staging evals under real traffic while containing damage if sequencing behavior diverges.
Option A is incorrect because simultaneous full replacement offers no limited blast radius and complicates rapid rollback decisions.
Option C is incorrect because manual regional installs are slow, inconsistent, and poorly suited to Foundry/Azure multi-agent release management.
Option D is incorrect because releases are when monitoring and alerts are most critical, not optional noise.