# Claude-Flow v3 Architecture Assessment

**Date:** 2026-01-03
**Analyzed Version:** 2.7.47
**Codebase Size:** ~130,000 lines TypeScript, 376 files
**Assessment by:** System Architecture Designer

---

## Executive Summary

Claude-Flow is a sophisticated multi-agent orchestration platform with deep integration into the agentic-flow ecosystem. The current v2.x architecture demonstrates strong engineering practices but suffers from architectural complexity, overlapping concerns, and scalability limitations. This assessment provides a comprehensive analysis and roadmap for v3 redesign focused on modularity, performance, and agentic-flow-native architecture.

**Key Metrics:**
- Total TypeScript Files: 376
- Lines of Code: ~130,000
- Core Dependencies: agentic-flow (^1.9.4), ruv-swarm (^1.0.14), flow-nexus (^0.1.128)
- MCP Protocol Version: 2024.11.5
- Node Version: >=20.0.0

---

## 1. Current Architecture Analysis

### 1.1 Core Architecture Layers

```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                        CLI Layer                             │
│  (cli-core.ts, commands/, main.ts)                          │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
                            ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                   Orchestration Layer                        │
│  (orchestrator.ts, agent-manager.ts, session-manager)       │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
                            ↓
┌──────────────────┬──────────────────┬──────────────────────┐
│   Swarm System   │  Memory System   │    MCP Server        │
│  (coordinator,   │  (manager,       │  (server, tools,     │
│   executor,      │   backends,      │   transports)        │
│   strategies)    │   cache)         │                      │
└──────────────────┴──────────────────┴──────────────────────┘
                            ↓
┌──────────────────┬──────────────────┬──────────────────────┐
│  Specialized     │  Integration     │   Infrastructure     │
│  Systems         │  Layer           │   Layer              │
│  (hive-mind,     │  (hooks,         │  (event-bus,         │
│   maestro,       │   neural,        │   logger,            │
│   verification)  │   reasoningbank) │   persistence)       │
└──────────────────┴──────────────────┴──────────────────────┘
```

### 1.2 Module Dependencies Analysis

**High Coupling Components:**
1. **Orchestrator** (`src/core/orchestrator.ts` - 1,440 lines)
   - Depends on: TerminalManager, MemoryManager, CoordinationManager, MCPServer, EventBus, Logger
   - Couples: Session management, task assignment, health monitoring, agent lifecycle
   - **Issue:** God object antipattern - manages too many concerns

2. **Agent Manager** (`src/agents/agent-manager.ts` - 1,736 lines)
   - Manages: Agent lifecycle, health monitoring, pools, clusters, scaling
   - **Issue:** Overlaps with Orchestrator responsibilities, duplicate session management

3. **MCP Server** (`src/mcp/server.ts` - 647 lines)
   - Integrates: Transport layer, tool registry, session management, load balancing
   - **Strength:** Clean separation of concerns with transport abstraction
   - **Issue:** Tight coupling to orchestrator instance

4. **Memory Manager** (`src/memory/manager.ts` - 560 lines)
   - Backend abstraction: SQLite, Markdown, Hybrid
   - Caching layer with indexer
   - **Strength:** Good backend abstraction pattern
   - **Issue:** Multiple memory implementations (manager, distributed-memory, swarm-memory, advanced-memory-manager)

### 1.3 Entry Points

**Primary Entry Points:**
1. **CLI Entry** - `src/cli/main.ts` → `cli-core.ts` → `commands/index.ts`
2. **MCP Entry** - `src/mcp/server.ts` → `mcp-server.ts` (tool registration)
3. **Programmatic Entry** - `src/core/index.ts` (exports core components)

**Command Structure:**
```
commands/
├── agent.ts, agent-simple.ts          # Agent management
├── swarm.ts, swarm-spawn.ts           # Swarm orchestration
├── hive.ts, hive-mind/                # Hive Mind system
├── maestro.ts                         # Maestro workflow
├── enterprise.ts (108KB!)             # Enterprise features
├── sparc.ts                           # SPARC methodology
├── memory.ts, advanced-memory-commands.ts
├── neural-init.ts, goal-init.ts       # Neural/goal initialization
├── session.ts, workflow.ts            # Session and workflow management
└── index.ts (108KB!)                  # Command setup aggregator
```

**Issues:**
- Command files too large (index.ts 108KB, enterprise.ts 68KB)
- Unclear separation between simple and advanced commands
- Multiple overlapping entry points for similar functionality

### 1.4 Memory Management Architecture

**Current Implementation:**
```typescript
// Memory backends with abstraction pattern
interface IMemoryBackend {
  initialize(): Promise<void>;
  store(entry: MemoryEntry): Promise<void>;
  retrieve(id: string): Promise<MemoryEntry | undefined>;
  query(query: MemoryQuery): Promise<MemoryEntry[]>;
  // ... more methods
}

// Multiple implementations
- SQLiteBackend (structured storage)
- MarkdownBackend (human-readable)
- HybridBackend (combines both)
- DistributedMemorySystem (cross-agent sharing)
- SwarmMemory (swarm-specific)
- AdvancedMemoryManager (enterprise features)
```

**Strengths:**
- Clean abstraction with IMemoryBackend interface
- Hybrid backend combining SQLite + Markdown
- Cache layer with LRU eviction
- Memory indexer for fast queries
- Event-driven synchronization

**Weaknesses:**
- Too many memory implementations without clear differentiation
- Unclear which system to use in which context
- Potential conflicts between distributed and local memory
- No unified memory query language

### 1.5 Swarm Coordination Patterns

**Current Coordination Systems:**

1. **SwarmCoordinator** (`src/swarm/coordinator.ts` - 27KB!)
   - Implements: mesh, hierarchical, centralized topologies
   - Features: Task decomposition, agent selection, consensus
   - **Issue:** Extremely large file with multiple responsibilities

2. **Hive Mind** (`src/hive-mind/`)
   - Queen-led coordination with worker agents
   - Consensus mechanisms (Raft, Byzantine)
   - Persistent memory integration
   - **Issue:** Overlaps with SwarmCoordinator, unclear when to use

3. **Maestro** (`src/maestro/`)
   - SPARC methodology execution
   - Specialized agent types (design-architect, system-architect, task-planner)
   - **Issue:** Another coordination layer, unclear differentiation

4. **AgentManager** pools and clusters
   - Agent pools with auto-scaling
   - Cluster coordination
   - **Issue:** More coordination logic, overlapping with above systems

**Critical Issues:**
- Four different coordination systems with overlapping responsibilities
- No clear guidelines on which to use
- Potential for conflicts and race conditions
- High maintenance burden

### 1.6 Hook System Architecture

**agentic-flow Integration:**
```
src/services/agentic-flow-hooks/
├── index.ts                    # Hook system initialization
├── hook-manager.ts             # Central hook manager
├── types.ts                    # Hook type definitions
├── workflow-hooks.ts           # Workflow lifecycle hooks
├── llm-hooks.ts               # LLM-specific hooks
├── memory-hooks.ts            # Memory persistence hooks
├── neural-hooks.ts            # Neural training hooks
└── performance-hooks.ts       # Performance optimization
```

**Strengths:**
- Comprehensive hook coverage (pre/post task, session, edit, etc.)
- Clean integration point with agentic-flow
- Event-driven architecture
- Extensible design

**Weaknesses:**
- Hook system is separate from core architecture
- Not deeply integrated into orchestrator lifecycle
- Limited hook composition and chaining
- Missing hooks for critical operations (agent spawn, task decomposition)

### 1.7 MCP Server Architecture

**Transport Layer Abstraction:**
```typescript
interface ITransport {
  start(): Promise<void>;
  stop(): Promise<void>;
  onRequest(handler: RequestHandler): void;
  getHealthStatus(): Promise<HealthStatus>;
}

Implementations:
- StdioTransport (stdin/stdout communication)
- HttpTransport (REST API)
```

**Tool Registry:**
- Dynamic tool registration
- Schema validation with JSON Schema
- Built-in tools: system/info, system/health, tools/list
- Integration tools: Claude-Flow tools, Swarm tools, ruv-swarm tools

**Session Management:**
- Per-connection sessions
- Protocol version negotiation
- Capability advertisement
- Load balancing and rate limiting

**Strengths:**
- Clean transport abstraction
- Proper MCP protocol compliance (2024.11.5)
- Extensible tool system
- Circuit breaker pattern for reliability

**Weaknesses:**
- Session management duplicated in orchestrator
- Tight coupling to orchestrator instance (dependency injection)
- Limited toolcontext passing
- No tool versioning or deprecation mechanism

---

## 2. Architectural Strengths

### 2.1 Design Patterns

**Well-Implemented Patterns:**

1. **Dependency Injection**
   - Interfaces for all major components (IOrchestrator, IMemoryManager, ILogger, etc.)
   - Constructor injection throughout
   - Enables testing and modularity

2. **Event-Driven Architecture**
   - Centralized EventBus for system-wide events
   - Event types: agent, task, system, memory, coordination
   - Loose coupling between components

3. **Circuit Breaker Pattern**
   - Used in orchestrator, session manager, MCP server
   - Prevents cascading failures
   - Auto-recovery with timeout

4. **Backend Abstraction**
   - IMemoryBackend for storage systems
   - ITransport for communication
   - Enables switching implementations without code changes

5. **Retry with Exponential Backoff**
   - Used in session creation, component initialization
   - Improves reliability in distributed environments

6. **Template Pattern**
   - Agent templates with capabilities, config, environment
   - Reusable agent definitions
   - Enables agent pools

### 2.2 Code Quality

**Positive Aspects:**
- TypeScript with strict mode enabled
- Comprehensive type definitions (swarm/types.ts - 1,148 lines)
- Interface-driven design
- Error handling with custom error types
- Extensive JSDoc comments
- Consistent naming conventions

**Metrics:**
```typescript
// Example of strong typing
export interface TaskDefinition {
  id: TaskId;
  type: TaskType;
  requirements: TaskRequirements;
  constraints: TaskConstraints;
  // ... 30+ well-defined fields
}
```

### 2.3 Infrastructure

**Solid Foundation:**
1. **Logging** - Structured logging with levels
2. **Persistence** - JSON and SQLite persistence
3. **Health Monitoring** - Component health checks
4. **Metrics Collection** - Performance and usage metrics
5. **Configuration Management** - ConfigManager with validation

---

## 3. Architectural Weaknesses

### 3.1 Modularity Issues

**Problem: Lack of Bounded Contexts**

Current structure groups by technical layer (cli/, core/, mcp/, swarm/) rather than business domains. This leads to:
- Features scattered across multiple directories
- Unclear feature ownership
- High coupling between layers
- Difficult to understand complete features

**Recommended Structure:**
```
src/
├── agent-lifecycle/        # Bounded context: Agent management
│   ├── domain/            # Domain models, interfaces
│   ├── application/       # Use cases, services
│   ├── infrastructure/    # Implementations
│   └── api/              # External API (CLI, MCP tools)
├── task-execution/        # Bounded context: Task orchestration
├── memory-management/     # Bounded context: Memory systems
├── coordination/          # Bounded context: Multi-agent coordination
└── shared-kernel/         # Shared types, utilities
```

### 3.2 Overlapping Responsibilities

**Issue: Multiple Systems for Same Concerns**

| Concern | Current Implementations | Recommended |
|---------|------------------------|-------------|
| Agent Management | Orchestrator, AgentManager, SwarmCoordinator, Hive Mind Queen | Single AgentLifecycleService |
| Session Management | Orchestrator SessionManager, MCP SessionManager | Single SessionService |
| Coordination | SwarmCoordinator, Hive Mind, Maestro, AgentManager clusters | Single CoordinationEngine with strategies |
| Memory | MemoryManager, DistributedMemory, SwarmMemory, AdvancedMemoryManager | Single MemoryService with backends |

### 3.3 Monolithic Components

**Large Files Requiring Decomposition:**

| File | Size | Lines | Issues |
|------|------|-------|--------|
| `cli/commands/index.ts` | 108KB | ~2,700 | All command registration in one file |
| `cli/commands/enterprise.ts` | 68KB | ~1,700 | Massive enterprise feature dump |
| `swarm/coordinator.ts` | 28KB | ~800 | God object for coordination |
| `agents/agent-manager.ts` | - | 1,736 | Too many responsibilities |
| `core/orchestrator.ts` | - | 1,440 | Orchestration + session + task + health |

**Decomposition Strategy:**
- Apply Single Responsibility Principle
- Extract feature modules
- Create focused services
- Use composition over inheritance

### 3.4 Dependency Graph Issues

**Current Dependency Chain:**
```
CLI → Orchestrator → [TerminalManager, MemoryManager, CoordinationManager, MCPServer]
                    ↓
                [SwarmCoordinator, AgentManager]
                    ↓
                [HiveMind, Maestro, Verification]
```

**Problems:**
1. Deep dependency chains (6+ levels)
2. Circular dependencies risk
3. Tight coupling makes testing difficult
4. Changes propagate through many layers
5. Difficult to understand component relationships

**Recommended:**
- Flatten hierarchy to 3-4 layers max
- Use mediator pattern for cross-cutting concerns
- Implement dependency inversion
- Create clear module boundaries

### 3.5 Testing Challenges

**Current State:**
- Test files scattered: `src/__tests__/`, `src/swarm/__tests__/`, etc.
- Integration tests in `src/__tests__/integration/`
- Heavy reliance on real dependencies
- Difficult to mock due to tight coupling

**Issues:**
- Hard to unit test due to constructor injection of many dependencies
- No clear test organization
- Missing contract tests between modules
- Limited property-based testing

---

## 4. agentic-flow Integration Analysis

### 4.1 Current Integration Points

**Dependencies:**
```json
"dependencies": {
  "agentic-flow": "^1.9.4",
  "ruv-swarm": "^1.0.14",
  "flow-nexus": "^0.1.128"
}
```

**Integration Locations:**
1. **Hook System** (`src/services/agentic-flow-hooks/`)
   - Workflow hooks, LLM hooks, memory hooks
   - Neural training hooks
   - Performance optimization hooks

2. **Orchestrator** (`src/core/orchestrator.ts`)
   - Session forking (ParallelSwarmExecutor)
   - Query control (RealTimeQueryController)
   - Lines 386-397: Parallel executor initialization

3. **CLI Commands**
   - Maestro CLI bridge uses agentic-flow hooks
   - Session commands integrate with agentic-flow

### 4.2 Integration Quality

**Strengths:**
- Clean separation via hook system
- Async/event-driven integration
- Minimal coupling to agentic-flow internals
- Graceful degradation when unavailable

**Weaknesses:**
- Integration is additive, not native
- Hook system feels bolted on rather than core
- Not using agentic-flow's orchestration capabilities fully
- Duplicating functionality (e.g., parallel execution)
- Limited use of agentic-flow's swarm coordination

### 4.3 Opportunities for v3

**Leverage agentic-flow Native Features:**

1. **Use agentic-flow's Swarm System**
   - Replace custom SwarmCoordinator with agentic-flow swarms
   - Use agentic-flow's built-in topology management
   - Leverage agentic-flow's consensus mechanisms

2. **Adopt agentic-flow Agent Model**
   - Use agentic-flow's Agent base class
   - Inherit agent lifecycle from agentic-flow
   - Use agentic-flow's communication patterns

3. **Memory Integration**
   - Use agentic-flow's memory system as primary
   - Add claude-flow-specific extensions via plugins
   - Leverage agentic-flow's distributed memory

4. **Task Execution**
   - Use agentic-flow's task graph execution
   - Add claude-flow-specific task types
   - Leverage agentic-flow's retry and fault tolerance

**Architecture Shift:**
```
Current: claude-flow implements everything, integrates with agentic-flow
   v3: agentic-flow provides core, claude-flow extends and specializes
```

---

## 5. Modularization Opportunities

### 5.1 Bounded Context Decomposition

**Proposed Domain Model:**

```
Claude-Flow v3 Domains:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│            Shared Kernel (types, interfaces)            │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
         ↓           ↓           ↓           ↓
┌────────────┬────────────┬────────────┬────────────────┐
│  Agent     │   Task     │  Memory    │ Coordination   │
│  Lifecycle │  Execution │  Service   │ Engine         │
│            │            │            │                │
│  - Spawn   │  - Create  │  - Store   │  - Topology    │
│  - Monitor │  - Assign  │  - Retrieve│  - Consensus   │
│  - Scale   │  - Execute │  - Query   │  - Load Balance│
│  - Health  │  - Retry   │  - Sync    │  - Discovery   │
└────────────┴────────────┴────────────┴────────────────┘
         ↓           ↓           ↓           ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│               Infrastructure Layer                       │
│  (Event Bus, Logger, Persistence, MCP, Transports)      │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```

### 5.2 Module Structure

**Recommended Directory Structure:**
```
src/
├── agent-lifecycle/
│   ├── domain/
│   │   ├── models/           # Agent, AgentState, AgentPool
│   │   ├── interfaces/       # IAgentLifecycle, IAgentRepository
│   │   └── events/          # AgentSpawned, AgentTerminated
│   ├── application/
│   │   ├── services/        # AgentLifecycleService
│   │   ├── handlers/        # Event handlers
│   │   └── queries/         # Query services
│   ├── infrastructure/
│   │   ├── repositories/    # AgentRepository implementation
│   │   └── adapters/        # External system adapters
│   └── api/
│       ├── cli/            # CLI commands for agents
│       └── mcp/            # MCP tools for agents
│
├── task-execution/
│   ├── domain/             # Task, TaskGraph, TaskResult
│   ├── application/        # TaskOrchestrationService
│   ├── infrastructure/     # TaskRepository, TaskScheduler
│   └── api/               # Task CLI and MCP tools
│
├── memory-management/
│   ├── domain/            # MemoryEntry, MemoryQuery
│   ├── application/       # MemoryService, CacheService
│   ├── infrastructure/    # SQLiteBackend, MarkdownBackend
│   └── api/              # Memory CLI and MCP tools
│
├── coordination/
│   ├── domain/           # Topology, ConsensusProtocol
│   ├── application/      # CoordinationEngine
│   ├── strategies/       # Mesh, Hierarchical, Centralized
│   └── api/             # Coordination CLI and MCP tools
│
├── shared-kernel/
│   ├── types/           # Shared type definitions
│   ├── events/          # System-wide events
│   ├── errors/          # Custom error classes
│   └── utils/           # Shared utilities
│
└── infrastructure/
    ├── event-bus/       # Event infrastructure
    ├── logging/         # Logging infrastructure
    ├── persistence/     # Persistence layer
    ├── mcp/            # MCP server core
    └── transport/      # Transport implementations
```

**Benefits:**
- Clear feature boundaries
- Easy to find and modify features
- Independent deployment potential
- Reduced coupling
- Easier testing
- Team scalability

### 5.3 Plugin Architecture

**Extensibility via Plugins:**

```typescript
// Plugin interface
interface ClaudeFlowPlugin {
  name: string;
  version: string;
  initialize(context: PluginContext): Promise<void>;
  shutdown(): Promise<void>;

  // Optional hooks
  registerAgentTypes?(): AgentTypeDefinition[];
  registerTaskTypes?(): TaskTypeDefinition[];
  registerMemoryBackends?(): MemoryBackendFactory[];
  registerMCPTools?(): MCPTool[];
  registerCLICommands?(): Command[];
}

// Core plugins
- AgentLifecyclePlugin
- TaskExecutionPlugin
- MemoryPlugin
- CoordinationPlugin

// Extended plugins
- HiveMindPlugin (optional advanced coordination)
- MaestroPlugin (optional SPARC methodology)
- VerificationPlugin (optional truth scoring)
- NeuralPlugin (optional neural training)
```

**Plugin Loading:**
```typescript
const core = new ClaudeFlowCore();

// Load required plugins
await core.loadPlugin(new AgentLifecyclePlugin());
await core.loadPlugin(new TaskExecutionPlugin());

// Load optional plugins based on config
if (config.features.hiveMind) {
  await core.loadPlugin(new HiveMindPlugin());
}

await core.initialize();
```

---

## 6. Recommendations for v3

### 6.1 Architectural Principles

**P1: agentic-flow Native**
- Build on agentic-flow primitives, don't reimplement
- Use agentic-flow's agent model as foundation
- Extend via plugins and hooks, not parallel systems
- Contribute improvements back to agentic-flow

**P2: Domain-Driven Design**
- Organize by business domain (agent lifecycle, task execution)
- Clear bounded contexts with explicit interfaces
- Ubiquitous language across team
- Domain models independent of infrastructure

**P3: Microkernel Architecture**
- Minimal core with essential functionality
- Everything else as plugins
- Clear plugin lifecycle
- Dynamic plugin loading/unloading

**P4: Event-Driven**
- Event sourcing for state changes
- CQRS for read/write separation
- Eventual consistency acceptable
- Saga pattern for distributed transactions

**P5: API-First**
- MCP as primary interface
- CLI built on MCP tools
- Programmatic API for embedders
- OpenAPI/GraphQL for HTTP

### 6.2 Technology Recommendations

**Core Stack:**
- **Runtime:** Node.js 20+ (TypeScript 5.x)
- **Base Framework:** agentic-flow ^2.0 (when released)
- **Protocol:** MCP 2025.x
- **Database:** Better-sqlite3 (with AgentDB for vectors)
- **Event Bus:** Native EventEmitter (upgrade to Redis/NATS for distributed)
- **Testing:** Vitest (faster than Jest)

**Optional Enhancements:**
- **Observability:** OpenTelemetry
- **Tracing:** Zipkin/Jaeger
- **Metrics:** Prometheus
- **Validation:** Zod (replace AJV)
- **DI Container:** tsyringe or awilix

### 6.3 Migration Strategy

**Phase 1: Foundation (Weeks 1-4)**
1. Create new `src-v3/` directory alongside `src/`
2. Implement shared-kernel with core types
3. Build infrastructure layer (event-bus, logging, persistence)
4. Create plugin system architecture
5. Set up testing infrastructure

**Phase 2: Core Domains (Weeks 5-12)**
1. Implement agent-lifecycle domain
   - Domain models and interfaces
   - Application services
   - Repository implementations
   - CLI and MCP APIs
2. Implement task-execution domain
3. Implement memory-management domain
4. Implement coordination domain

**Phase 3: Plugin Migration (Weeks 13-16)**
1. Extract specialized features as plugins:
   - HiveMind → HiveMindPlugin
   - Maestro → MaestroPlugin
   - Neural → NeuralPlugin
2. Maintain backwards compatibility
3. Deprecate old APIs

**Phase 4: Integration & Testing (Weeks 17-20)**
1. Integration testing across domains
2. Performance testing and optimization
3. Migration guides and documentation
4. Beta release for community testing

**Phase 5: Production Release (Weeks 21-24)**
1. Final testing and bug fixes
2. Release v3.0.0
3. Support dual versions (v2 maintenance, v3 active)
4. Gradual user migration

### 6.4 Breaking Changes

**Accept These Breaking Changes:**
1. New directory structure
2. Different plugin loading mechanism
3. Simplified coordination (one system, not four)
4. Unified memory API
5. MCP-first CLI (commands as thin wrappers)

**Maintain Compatibility:**
1. Core MCP tools (agents, tasks, memory)
2. Configuration file format
3. Data persistence (upgrade path for databases)
4. Hook system (adapt to new architecture)

### 6.5 Performance Targets

**Benchmarks to Achieve:**
- Agent spawn time: <100ms (currently ~500ms)
- Task assignment latency: <10ms (currently ~50ms)
- Memory query: <5ms for indexed, <100ms for full-scan
- Swarm initialization: <500ms for 10 agents
- CLI command response: <200ms
- MCP tool execution: <1s average

**Optimization Strategies:**
- Lazy loading of plugins
- Connection pooling for all I/O
- Caching at every layer
- Parallel initialization
- Batch operations for bulk updates

### 6.6 Quality Metrics

**Code Quality Gates:**
- Test coverage: >80% (currently unknown)
- Type coverage: 100% (no `any` types)
- Cyclomatic complexity: <15 per function
- File size: <500 lines per file
- Dependencies: <10 per module

**Architecture Quality:**
- Coupling: <20% (low coupling)
- Cohesion: >70% (high cohesion)
- Abstraction: 60-80% (balanced)
- Instability: <30% (stable interfaces)

---

## 7. Specific Component Redesigns

### 7.1 Agent Lifecycle Redesign

**Current Issues:**
- Orchestrator and AgentManager both manage agents
- Session management duplicated
- Health monitoring scattered

**v3 Design:**
```typescript
// Domain model
class Agent {
  constructor(
    private id: AgentId,
    private type: AgentType,
    private capabilities: AgentCapabilities
  ) {}

  // Domain logic only
  canHandle(task: Task): boolean;
  assignTask(task: Task): void;
  reportHealth(): AgentHealth;
}

// Application service
class AgentLifecycleService {
  constructor(
    private agentRepository: IAgentRepository,
    private eventBus: IEventBus,
    private agenticFlowClient: AgenticFlowClient // Use agentic-flow
  ) {}

  async spawnAgent(template: AgentTemplate): Promise<AgentId> {
    // Use agentic-flow to spawn
    const agentId = await this.agenticFlowClient.spawnAgent({
      type: template.type,
      capabilities: template.capabilities
    });

    // Track in our repository
    const agent = new Agent(agentId, template.type, template.capabilities);
    await this.agentRepository.save(agent);

    // Emit event
    this.eventBus.emit(new AgentSpawned(agent));

    return agentId;
  }

  async terminateAgent(agentId: AgentId): Promise<void>;
  async scaleAgentPool(poolId: string, targetSize: number): Promise<void>;
  async getAgentHealth(agentId: AgentId): Promise<AgentHealth>;
}

// CLI command (thin wrapper)
class SpawnAgentCommand {
  constructor(private agentService: AgentLifecycleService) {}

  async execute(args: SpawnAgentArgs): Promise<void> {
    const agentId = await this.agentService.spawnAgent(args.template);
    console.log(`Agent spawned: ${agentId}`);
  }
}
```

**Benefits:**
- Clear separation of concerns
- Single source of truth for agent state
- Leverages agentic-flow for execution
- Easy to test each layer
- Extensible via events

### 7.2 Memory Management Redesign

**Current Issues:**
- Multiple memory systems (6 implementations)
- Unclear which to use when
- Duplicate functionality

**v3 Design:**
```typescript
// Single memory service with backend strategy
class MemoryService {
  constructor(
    private backend: IMemoryBackend, // Selected via config
    private cache: IMemoryCache,
    private indexer: IMemoryIndexer,
    private eventBus: IEventBus
  ) {}

  async store(entry: MemoryEntry): Promise<void> {
    // Validate
    this.validate(entry);

    // Cache
    this.cache.set(entry.id, entry);

    // Index
    this.indexer.index(entry);

    // Persist (async)
    this.backend.store(entry).catch(this.handleError);

    // Event
    this.eventBus.emit(new MemoryStored(entry));
  }

  async query(query: MemoryQuery): Promise<MemoryEntry[]> {
    // Use indexer for fast path
    return this.indexer.search(query);
  }
}

// Backend implementations
class AgentDBBackend implements IMemoryBackend {
  // Vector search + structured storage
  // Use for semantic search
}

class SQLiteBackend implements IMemoryBackend {
  // Pure structured storage
  // Use for transactional data
}

class HybridBackend implements IMemoryBackend {
  // Combines AgentDB + SQLite
  // Best of both worlds
}

// Factory selection
class MemoryBackendFactory {
  static create(config: MemoryConfig): IMemoryBackend {
    switch (config.backend) {
      case 'agentdb': return new AgentDBBackend(config);
      case 'sqlite': return new SQLiteBackend(config);
      case 'hybrid': return new HybridBackend(config);
      default: throw new Error(`Unknown backend: ${config.backend}`);
    }
  }
}
```

**Backend Selection Guide:**
| Use Case | Backend | Reason |
|----------|---------|--------|
| Semantic search, RAG | AgentDB | Vector similarity |
| Structured queries, ACID | SQLite | Transactions |
| General purpose | Hybrid | Flexibility |
| Distributed swarm | Distributed + Hybrid | Cross-agent |

### 7.3 Coordination Engine Redesign

**Current Issues:**
- 4 coordination systems (Swarm, Hive, Maestro, AgentManager)
- Unclear responsibilities
- Difficult to choose

**v3 Design:**
```typescript
// Single coordination engine with strategy pattern
class CoordinationEngine {
  constructor(
    private topology: ITopologyStrategy,
    private scheduler: ITaskScheduler,
    private loadBalancer: ILoadBalancer,
    private eventBus: IEventBus
  ) {}

  async assignTask(task: Task): Promise<AgentId> {
    // Get available agents from topology
    const agents = await this.topology.getAvailableAgents();

    // Select best agent via load balancer
    const agent = this.loadBalancer.selectAgent(agents, task);

    // Schedule task
    await this.scheduler.schedule(task, agent);

    // Emit event
    this.eventBus.emit(new TaskAssigned(task.id, agent.id));

    return agent.id;
  }

  async initializeTopology(mode: TopologyMode): Promise<void> {
    switch (mode) {
      case 'mesh':
        this.topology = new MeshTopology();
        break;
      case 'hierarchical':
        this.topology = new HierarchicalTopology();
        break;
      case 'centralized':
        this.topology = new CentralizedTopology();
        break;
    }

    await this.topology.initialize();
  }
}

// Topology strategies
interface ITopologyStrategy {
  initialize(): Promise<void>;
  getAvailableAgents(): Promise<Agent[]>;
  registerAgent(agent: Agent): Promise<void>;
  routeMessage(from: AgentId, to: AgentId, message: any): Promise<void>;
}

// Use agentic-flow's coordination when possible
class AgenticFlowTopology implements ITopologyStrategy {
  constructor(private agenticFlowClient: AgenticFlowClient) {}

  async initialize(): Promise<void> {
    // Delegate to agentic-flow
    await this.agenticFlowClient.initializeSwarm();
  }

  // Implement other methods using agentic-flow
}
```

**Topology Selection:**
- **Centralized:** Simple tasks, small teams (<10 agents)
- **Hierarchical:** Large teams (10-100 agents), clear hierarchy
- **Mesh:** High autonomy, peer-to-peer, resilience
- **AgenticFlow:** Complex coordination, leverage agentic-flow native

### 7.4 MCP Server Redesign

**Current Strengths:**
- Clean transport abstraction
- Good tool registry
- Proper session management

**v3 Enhancements:**
```typescript
// Tool versioning and deprecation
interface MCPToolDefinition {
  name: string;
  version: string; // Semantic versioning
  description: string;
  deprecated?: {
    since: string;
    alternative: string;
    removeIn: string;
  };
  inputSchema: JSONSchema;
  handler: MCPToolHandler;
}

// Tool composition
class CompositeMCPTool implements MCPTool {
  constructor(private tools: MCPTool[]) {}

  async execute(input: any, context: MCPContext): Promise<any> {
    // Chain tools together
    let result = input;
    for (const tool of this.tools) {
      result = await tool.execute(result, context);
    }
    return result;
  }
}

// Tool discovery
class MCPToolRegistry {
  async listTools(filter?: ToolFilter): Promise<MCPToolDefinition[]> {
    const tools = this.getAllTools();

    // Filter by category, version, deprecated, etc.
    return tools.filter(tool => this.matchesFilter(tool, filter));
  }

  async getTool(name: string, version?: string): Promise<MCPTool> {
    // Support versioned tool retrieval
    return this.tools.get(this.getKey(name, version));
  }
}

// Better context passing
interface MCPContext {
  sessionId: string;
  userId?: string;
  permissions: string[];

  // Access to services
  agentService: AgentLifecycleService;
  taskService: TaskExecutionService;
  memoryService: MemoryService;
  coordinationEngine: CoordinationEngine;

  // Metadata
  metadata: Record<string, any>;
}
```

---

## 8. Implementation Priorities

### 8.1 Priority Matrix

| Priority | Component | Effort | Impact | Risk |
|----------|-----------|--------|--------|------|
| P0 | Shared Kernel (types, events) | Low | High | Low |
| P0 | Infrastructure Layer (event-bus, logger) | Low | High | Low |
| P0 | Plugin System Architecture | Medium | High | Medium |
| P1 | Agent Lifecycle Domain | High | High | Medium |
| P1 | Task Execution Domain | High | High | Medium |
| P1 | Memory Management Domain | Medium | High | Low |
| P2 | Coordination Engine | High | Medium | High |
| P2 | MCP Server v3 | Medium | Medium | Low |
| P3 | HiveMind Plugin | Medium | Low | Low |
| P3 | Maestro Plugin | Medium | Low | Low |
| P3 | Neural Plugin | Low | Low | Low |

### 8.2 Iterative Delivery

**Sprint 1-2: Foundation**
- [ ] Create src-v3/ directory structure
- [ ] Implement shared-kernel types
- [ ] Build event-bus infrastructure
- [ ] Create logger service
- [ ] Set up testing framework (Vitest)

**Sprint 3-4: Core Domain - Agent Lifecycle**
- [ ] Agent domain models
- [ ] AgentLifecycleService
- [ ] AgentRepository (SQLite)
- [ ] Agent CLI commands
- [ ] Agent MCP tools
- [ ] Integration tests

**Sprint 5-6: Core Domain - Task Execution**
- [ ] Task domain models
- [ ] TaskOrchestrationService
- [ ] TaskScheduler
- [ ] Task CLI commands
- [ ] Task MCP tools
- [ ] Integration tests

**Sprint 7-8: Core Domain - Memory Management**
- [ ] Memory domain models
- [ ] MemoryService with backends
- [ ] Cache and indexer
- [ ] Memory CLI commands
- [ ] Memory MCP tools
- [ ] Migration from v2 data

**Sprint 9-10: Coordination Engine**
- [ ] Topology strategies
- [ ] CoordinationEngine
- [ ] Load balancer
- [ ] agentic-flow integration
- [ ] Integration tests

**Sprint 11-12: MCP Server v3**
- [ ] Enhanced tool registry
- [ ] Context passing
- [ ] Tool versioning
- [ ] CLI-to-MCP bridge
- [ ] Performance optimization

**Sprint 13-16: Plugins & Migration**
- [ ] HiveMind plugin
- [ ] Maestro plugin
- [ ] Neural plugin
- [ ] Migration tooling
- [ ] Backward compatibility layer
- [ ] Documentation

**Sprint 17-20: Testing & Release**
- [ ] End-to-end testing
- [ ] Performance testing
- [ ] Load testing
- [ ] Beta release
- [ ] Community feedback
- [ ] Final adjustments
- [ ] v3.0.0 release

---

## 9. Success Criteria

### 9.1 Functional Requirements

**Must Have:**
- [ ] All v2 features available in v3
- [ ] MCP protocol fully implemented
- [ ] Agent spawn/terminate/scale
- [ ] Task creation/execution/monitoring
- [ ] Memory store/retrieve/query
- [ ] Multi-agent coordination
- [ ] CLI commands for all features
- [ ] Migration path from v2

**Should Have:**
- [ ] Plugin system functional
- [ ] agentic-flow native integration
- [ ] Performance improvements
- [ ] Better error messages
- [ ] Comprehensive documentation

**Nice to Have:**
- [ ] GraphQL API
- [ ] Web UI
- [ ] Advanced observability
- [ ] Multi-tenant support

### 9.2 Non-Functional Requirements

**Performance:**
- Agent spawn: <100ms (5x improvement)
- Task assignment: <10ms (5x improvement)
- Memory query: <5ms (indexed)
- CLI commands: <200ms response
- Throughput: 100+ tasks/minute

**Scalability:**
- Support 100+ concurrent agents
- Handle 1000+ tasks in queue
- Manage 1M+ memory entries
- Coordinate across distributed nodes

**Reliability:**
- 99.9% uptime for core services
- <0.1% task failure rate
- Graceful degradation
- Auto-recovery from failures

**Maintainability:**
- <500 lines per file
- >80% test coverage
- <15 cyclomatic complexity
- Clear documentation
- Onboarding time <1 day

**Security:**
- Input validation on all APIs
- Authentication for MCP
- Authorization for agent actions
- Audit logging
- Secret management

### 9.3 Migration Success

**Data Migration:**
- [ ] 100% of v2 data migrated to v3
- [ ] No data loss
- [ ] Downtime <30 minutes
- [ ] Rollback capability

**User Migration:**
- [ ] Clear migration guide
- [ ] Automated migration tool
- [ ] Side-by-side compatibility
- [ ] Gradual feature flag rollout

**Developer Migration:**
- [ ] API compatibility layer
- [ ] Deprecation warnings
- [ ] 6-month support window for v2
- [ ] Example code for common migrations

---

## 10. Risk Assessment

### 10.1 Technical Risks

**Risk: Breaking Changes Impact Users**
- **Likelihood:** High
- **Impact:** High
- **Mitigation:**
  - Maintain v2 support for 6 months
  - Provide automated migration tools
  - Feature flags for gradual rollout
  - Clear communication plan

**Risk: agentic-flow Dependency**
- **Likelihood:** Medium
- **Impact:** High
- **Mitigation:**
  - Maintain abstraction layer over agentic-flow
  - Contribute to agentic-flow to fix issues
  - Have fallback implementations
  - Lock agentic-flow version initially

**Risk: Performance Regression**
- **Likelihood:** Medium
- **Impact:** High
- **Mitigation:**
  - Comprehensive benchmarking
  - Performance tests in CI
  - Load testing before release
  - Profiling and optimization

**Risk: Plugin System Complexity**
- **Likelihood:** Medium
- **Impact:** Medium
- **Mitigation:**
  - Start simple, iterate
  - Thorough documentation
  - Example plugins
  - Plugin development guide

### 10.2 Project Risks

**Risk: Scope Creep**
- **Likelihood:** High
- **Impact:** Medium
- **Mitigation:**
  - Strict prioritization
  - Defer nice-to-haves
  - Time-boxed sprints
  - Regular scope reviews

**Risk: Resource Constraints**
- **Likelihood:** Medium
- **Impact:** High
- **Mitigation:**
  - Prioritize ruthlessly
  - Phase delivery
  - Community contributions
  - Focus on core first

**Risk: Integration Complexity**
- **Likelihood:** High
- **Impact:** Medium
- **Mitigation:**
  - Start with clean slate (src-v3/)
  - Incremental integration
  - Extensive testing
  - Clear module boundaries

---

## 11. Conclusion

### 11.1 Summary

Claude-Flow v2.x is a sophisticated system with strong foundations but architectural complexity that limits scalability and maintainability. The v3 redesign presents an opportunity to:

1. **Simplify** by adopting agentic-flow native architecture
2. **Modularize** through domain-driven design and bounded contexts
3. **Extend** via a robust plugin system
4. **Optimize** for performance and developer experience
5. **Scale** to support larger agent swarms and workloads

### 11.2 Key Takeaways

**Preserve These Strengths:**
- Event-driven architecture
- Interface-based design
- Circuit breaker patterns
- Backend abstraction
- MCP protocol implementation

**Address These Weaknesses:**
- Overlapping coordination systems (consolidate to one)
- Duplicate session management (unify)
- Monolithic files (decompose)
- Deep dependency chains (flatten)
- Unclear module boundaries (enforce)

**Embrace These Opportunities:**
- agentic-flow native integration
- Plugin-based extensibility
- Domain-driven design
- Performance optimization
- Enhanced developer experience

### 11.3 Next Steps

**Immediate Actions:**
1. Review this assessment with core team
2. Validate architectural recommendations
3. Prioritize features for v3.0
4. Create detailed technical designs for P0/P1 components
5. Set up v3 development environment
6. Begin Sprint 1 implementation

**Long-term Vision:**
- v3.0: Core domains with plugin system (Q2 2026)
- v3.1: Advanced plugins (Hive, Maestro, Neural) (Q3 2026)
- v3.2: Distributed coordination, multi-tenant (Q4 2026)
- v4.0: AI-native architecture with AGI capabilities (2027)

---

**Document Version:** 1.0
**Assessment Conducted:** 2026-01-03
**Next Review:** 2026-02-01 (post Sprint 4)
**Owner:** Architecture Team
**Stakeholders:** Core Contributors, Community

---

## Appendices

### Appendix A: File Size Analysis

Top 20 largest files requiring decomposition:

```
108KB  src/cli/commands/index.ts
 68KB  src/cli/commands/enterprise.ts
 34KB  src/cli/commands/advanced-memory-commands.ts
 33KB  src/cli/commands/help.ts
 28KB  src/swarm/coordinator.ts
 24KB  src/cli/commands/workflow.ts
 21KB  src/cli/commands/swarm.ts
 21KB  src/cli/commands/session.ts
 20KB  src/cli/commands/memory.ts
 18KB  src/cli/commands/monitor.ts
 18KB  src/cli/commands/sparc.ts
 18KB  src/cli/commands/ruv-swarm.ts
 17KB  src/cli/commands/hive.ts
 17KB  src/agents/agent-manager.ts (1,736 lines)
 15KB  src/cli/commands/agent.ts
 15KB  src/cli/commands/config-integration.ts
 14KB  src/core/orchestrator.ts (1,440 lines)
 14KB  src/cli/commands/maestro.ts
 11KB  src/cli/commands/status.ts
 11KB  src/cli/commands/hook.ts
```

### Appendix B: Dependency Graph

**Core Dependencies Flow:**
```
CLI (commands/)
  ↓
Orchestrator (core/orchestrator.ts)
  ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
  Terminal  Memory  Coordination  MCP
  Manager   Manager  Manager      Server
  ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
  SwarmCoordinator
  ↓ ↓
  AgentManager  ResourceManager
  ↓
  HiveMind/Maestro/Verification
```

### Appendix C: agentic-flow Integration Points

**Current Integration:**
```typescript
// Orchestrator integrations
- ParallelSwarmExecutor (session forking)
- RealTimeQueryController (query control)

// Hook integrations
- workflow-hooks (pre/post task)
- llm-hooks (request/response)
- memory-hooks (persistence)
- neural-hooks (training)
- performance-hooks (optimization)

// CLI integrations
- maestro-cli-bridge (agentic hooks)
```

**Recommended v3 Integration:**
```typescript
// Use agentic-flow as foundation
- Agent base class from agentic-flow
- Swarm coordination from agentic-flow
- Task graph execution from agentic-flow
- Memory system from agentic-flow
- Add claude-flow extensions via plugins
```

### Appendix D: Testing Strategy

**Unit Testing:**
- Every domain model
- Every application service
- Mock all dependencies
- Aim for >90% coverage

**Integration Testing:**
- Cross-domain interactions
- Database persistence
- Event bus communication
- MCP tool execution

**End-to-End Testing:**
- CLI command workflows
- MCP client interactions
- Multi-agent scenarios
- Performance benchmarks

**Load Testing:**
- 100 concurrent agents
- 1000 tasks/minute throughput
- 1M memory entries
- Sustained load for 1 hour

---

**End of Assessment**
