concurrency-report
Report concurrency and parallelism for a session — how many agents ran in parallel, concurrency-lane utilization, peak parallel width, and serialization bottlenecks (sequential chains that could have run as parallel lanes) — using the Agent Monitor workflow intelligence API. Use
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/hoangsonww/Claude-Code-Agent-Monitor/tree/master/plugins/ccam-workflows/skills/concurrency-report
claude plugin marketplace add https://llmmart.ai/marketplace.json && claude plugin install hoangsonww-claude-code-agent-monitor@llmmart
git clone https://github.com/hoangsonww/Claude-Code-Agent-Monitor.git
The skills CLI installs just this skill, for any of its supported agents. Claude Code installs the whole hoangsonww/claude-code-agent-monitor collection as a plugin from our marketplace. Git is the plain clone.
Skill manifest
Concurrency Report
Report on parallel execution for one Claude Code session: lanes, peak width, utilization, and where work serialized.
Input
The user provides: $ARGUMENTS
A session ID. If empty, fetch GET /api/sessions?limit=1 and report on the most recent session, stating which one.
Data Sources
| Endpoint | Returns |
|---|---|
GET /api/workflows/{sessionId} |
The concurrency dataset (overlapping agent execution lanes with start/end timing) and the complexity dataset (numeric score from depth, breadth, and tool diversity) |
Report Sections
1. Parallelism Summary
From concurrency: number of distinct lanes, peak parallel width (max agents running simultaneously), and total agents. Pair with the complexity score to judge whether the parallelism matched the work's size.
Lanes: N · Peak parallel: M · Agents: K · Complexity: S
2. Lane Timeline
A per-lane list of the agents that occupied each lane in order:
Lane 1: explore (0–12s) → code-review (12–48s)
Lane 2: debugger (5–30s)
Show overlapping windows so simultaneity is visible.
3. Utilization
| Lane | Busy time | Idle time | Utilization % | |------|-----------|-----------|---------------| Plus an overall utilization figure (busy lane-time / total lane-time).
4. Serialization Bottlenecks
Identify sequential chains where one agent waited on the previous despite no apparent dependency — candidates to run as parallel lanes. State the chain and the wall-clock time it cost. Only flag chains the concurrency timing data actually shows as sequential.
Output
- Markdown tables for utilization; a fenced list for the lane timeline.
- Durations in human units (e.g.
48s,2m 10s); percentages to whole numbers. - Use ▲/▼ when comparing utilization against an even-distribution baseline.
- Cite only timing returned by the API; never invent lane overlaps or durations.
- If the session ran a single agent (no concurrency), say so plainly rather than inventing lanes.
- If the dashboard is unreachable, tell the user to start it with
npm startfrom the repo root.
Files (claude-code-agent-monitor)
-
agents
-
openai.yaml 278 B
interface: display_name: "Concurrency Report" short_description: "Report concurrency and parallelism for a session — how many..." default_prompt: "Use $concurrency-report to inspect CCAM data and complete this workflow safely." policy: allow_implicit_invocation: true
-
-
SKILL.md 2.5 KB
--- name: concurrency-report description: > Report concurrency and parallelism for a session — how many agents ran in parallel, concurrency-lane utilization, peak parallel width, and serialization bottlenecks (sequential chains that could have run as parallel lanes) — using the Agent Monitor workflow intelligence API. Use when checking whether a multi-agent session used parallelism efficiently. --- # Concurrency Report Report on parallel execution for one Claude Code session: lanes, peak width, utilization, and where work serialized. ## Input The user provides: **$ARGUMENTS** A session ID. If empty, fetch `GET /api/sessions?limit=1` and report on the most recent session, stating which one. ## Data Sources | Endpoint | Returns | |----------|---------| | `GET /api/workflows/{sessionId}` | The `concurrency` dataset (overlapping agent execution lanes with start/end timing) and the `complexity` dataset (numeric score from depth, breadth, and tool diversity) | ## Report Sections ### 1. Parallelism Summary From `concurrency`: number of distinct lanes, peak parallel width (max agents running simultaneously), and total agents. Pair with the `complexity` score to judge whether the parallelism matched the work's size. `Lanes: N · Peak parallel: M · Agents: K · Complexity: S` ### 2. Lane Timeline A per-lane list of the agents that occupied each lane in order: `Lane 1: explore (0–12s) → code-review (12–48s)` `Lane 2: debugger (5–30s)` Show overlapping windows so simultaneity is visible. ### 3. Utilization | Lane | Busy time | Idle time | Utilization % | |------|-----------|-----------|---------------| Plus an overall utilization figure (busy lane-time / total lane-time). ### 4. Serialization Bottlenecks Identify sequential chains where one agent waited on the previous despite no apparent dependency — candidates to run as parallel lanes. State the chain and the wall-clock time it cost. Only flag chains the `concurrency` timing data actually shows as sequential. ## Output - Markdown tables for utilization; a fenced list for the lane timeline. - Durations in human units (e.g. `48s`, `2m 10s`); percentages to whole numbers. - Use ▲/▼ when comparing utilization against an even-distribution baseline. - Cite only timing returned by the API; never invent lane overlaps or durations. - If the session ran a single agent (no concurrency), say so plainly rather than inventing lanes. - If the dashboard is unreachable, tell the user to start it with `npm start` from the repo root.
Comments (0)
Sign in to join the conversation.
Reviews (0)
No reviews yet.
No comments yet.