Index
One request can arrive through two queues or resume while another agent is still working. Without ownership control, both may prepare different responses and act on the same state.
The design to commission
Define request identity, temporary execution ownership and resumption rules. A textual owner field does not resolve races when two reads happen before either write. Protection belongs in the coordination mechanism rather than a promise that agents will communicate. Separate collaborative preparation from competing execution. Two participants may research options, but the final action needs one owner and a defined input version. Compare deterministic queues with agent orchestration; linear routines may only need the former. Cover expiring reservations, unresponsive workers and recovery that retains history. Reject locks that last forever as well as releases that permit duplicate effects. Suppliers should explain how decisions are confirmed by the actual destination system. Evaluate what happens when an older worker returns after its reservation has expired instead of testing only two healthy workers with immediate responses.
Supplier criteria
- Share one request identity across intake channels.
- Define execution reservation expiry and recovery rules.
- Retain the input version and final executor in history.
Acceptance with an exception
In hypothetical testing, two agents receive the same request almost simultaneously. Only one should confirm execution; the other must recognize the result or wait without causing an independent second effect.
Reference for assessing scope
Prepare your project with Quantum9
Bring Quantum9 request intake paths and a reprocessing example. We assess coordination, recovery and collaboration boundaries before expanding autonomy across the workflow.