Pattern Selection Map¶
Compare patterns by what they cost, where they break, and what they assume — then pick the cheapest one that solves your problem, not the most sophisticated.
Adopting agent patterns without comparing their costs leads to two failure modes documented on this site: stacking sophisticated patterns (cargo-cult agent setup) and stacking frontier-model roles until economics collapse (compound engineering's 80/20 inversion). The matrix below surfaces the trade-offs already documented on each pattern's canonical page so you can compare across them without re-reading every one.
The matrix is scoped to this site's 14 patterns that map onto a common set of axes. Patterns not on the matrix exist for cases where these axes are not the dominant trade-off — they live on their own pages.
The Matrix¶
| Pattern | Token cost | Latency overhead | Frontier-model dependency | Blast radius | Verification cost | Task class |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harness Engineering | low | none | none | contained writes | linter-able | open-ended |
| Agent Self-Review Loop | high | +N turns | one role | contained writes | eval-able | iterative |
| Cognitive Reasoning vs Execution | medium | +1 turn | one role | contained writes | linter-able | iterative |
| Episodic Memory Retrieval | low | +1 turn | none | read-only | eval-able | iterative |
| Agent Circuit Breaker | low | none | none | read-only | linter-able | iterative |
| Agent Backpressure | low | none | none | contained writes | linter-able | iterative |
| Multi-Agent Topology Taxonomy | medium | +N turns | one role | contained writes | human-only | open-ended |
| Declarative Multi-Agent Topology | medium | +N turns | one role | contained writes | linter-able | open-ended |
| Economic Value Signaling | medium | +N turns | none | production effects | human-only | open-ended |
| Review-Then-Implement Loop | high | +N turns | one role | contained writes | eval-able | iterative |
| Agentic Code Review Architecture | high | +N turns | one role | read-only | eval-able | iterative |
| Incremental Verification | low | +1 turn | none | contained writes | linter-able | iterative |
| Escape Hatches | low | none | none | read-only | human-only | open-ended |
| Compound Engineering | very high | unbounded | all roles | production effects | human-only | open-ended |
Axis Legend¶
Token cost — relative to a baseline single-shot prompt against the same task:
low— fixed overhead or one-time setup; per-task addition is negligiblemedium— roughly 1.5× to 2× baselinehigh— roughly 2× to 5× baseline (multiple review or critic passes per task)very high— 5×+ baseline or stacks frontier-model roles across plan/work/assess phases
Latency overhead — wall-clock impact on time-to-result:
none— runs in parallel or as setup; no per-task added latency+1 turn— adds one model round-trip+N turns— adds a bounded loop (typically 2–5 iterations or fan-out turns)unbounded— loops until convergence or human intervention
Frontier-model dependency — how many roles require a top-tier model to function:
none— works with mid-tier or open-weight modelsone role— one role (reasoning, reviewer, or planner) benefits materially from a frontier model; the rest can run on cheaper modelsall roles— every role (planner, executor, critic, reviewer, summariser, memory) benefits from a frontier model; the most expensive shape
Blast radius — the maximum reach of a failure or unintended action:
read-only— the pattern only observes or gates; no writes outside its own statecontained writes— writes are scoped to feature branches, ephemeral state, or pre-approved pathsproduction effects— writes reach production systems, shared ledgers, or persistent infrastructure without an automatic gate
Verification cost — how the pattern's correctness is checked:
linter-able— a deterministic script or type check confirms the pattern is wired correctlyeval-able— needs an LLM-graded or metric-based eval to confirm quality; deterministic checks are insufficienthuman-only— outcomes require human judgement to validate (taste, architecture review, market dynamics)
Task class — the kind of work the pattern fits:
one-shot— single-prompt, single-result tasksiterative— bounded loops with a clear convergence criterionopen-ended— long-running work without a fixed convergence point (greenfield, ongoing maintenance, multi-agent operations)
Why It Works¶
The matrix compresses information that is already present and sourced on each pattern's canonical page. Experienced engineers already think in trade-off axes when choosing architectural patterns — they just lack a centralised comparison surface. Cognitive offloading of the cross-page comparison step is the mechanism. The axes were chosen because they are the dimensions where stacking patterns blindly produces the documented failure modes: token economics, latency budgets, frontier-model cost, and blast radius are the four levers that the 80% problem in agentic coding traces production failures back to.
When This Backfires¶
The matrix is a comparison aid, not a recommendation engine. Three failure modes to watch:
- Pattern shopping — scanning the table and assembling several patterns at once produces the exact stack-everything failure mode the page exists to defuse. The TL;DR and the closing rule are deliberate counterweights.
- Stale rows — pattern pages evolve over time. If a pattern page changes its cost or blast-radius characterisation, the matrix row diverges silently until the next periodic audit catches it. The
last_reviewedfrontmatter dates the synthesis. - Axis flattening — a single ordinal value per axis hides distributions. A pattern marked
mediumtoken cost in steady state may spike tohighduring cold start or on certain task shapes. The canonical page carries the nuance; the matrix row does not.
Key Takeaways¶
- Compare across patterns on costs you already care about — token spend, latency, blast radius — before composing them.
low-cost patterns (harness engineering, agent backpressure, incremental verification) are the unsexy foundation; sophisticated patterns assume these are already in place.very highcost patterns (compound engineering) deliver on long horizons but collapse economics on short tasks — match cost class to task class.production effectsblast radius (economic value signaling, compound engineering) requires human-only verification — these are not patterns to stack speculatively.- If two patterns score similarly across all axes, pick the one your team can debug at 3am.
Related¶
- Patterns — the parent index this map sits under
- Cargo Cult Agent Setup — copying patterns without understanding the trade-offs is the failure mode this map exists to defuse
- AI Development Maturity Model — adoption phases for AI coding tools; complements the per-pattern trade-off view with a developmental view
- Cost-Aware Agent Design — the broader treatment of cost as a first-class design constraint
- Compound Engineering — the highest-cost pattern on the matrix; the planning/review investment that makes it economic