Agent Protocol
Define how multiple role-based agents invoke, respond, and chain context so revenue and planning workflows stay structured instead of free-form chat.
Overview
Agent Protocol is an agent skill most often used in Build (also Validate, Grow) that standardizes INVOKE/RESPONSE/CHAIN patterns so multi-agent planning chains stay auditable and context-rich.
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill agent-protocolWhat is this skill?
- Documents cross-functional invocation patterns with explicit when-to-invoke vs assume guidance
- Revenue Planning Chain example: CRO → CFO → CMO with structured RESPONSE payloads and confidence caveats
- Tagged message format: [INVOKE:role|question], [RESPONSE:role], and [CHAIN: a → b → c]
- Encourages synthesis steps after multi-agent responses rather than treating replies as final answers
- Maps executive roles (CRO, CFO, CMO) to pipeline, runway, and CAC constraints in worked examples
- Includes a worked Revenue Planning Chain across three executive roles (CRO, CFO, CMO)
Adoption & trust: 522 installs on skills.sh; 17.5k GitHub stars; 2/3 security scanners passed (skills.sh audits).
What problem does it solve?
Your multi-agent setup drifts into overlapping chats without clear handoffs, confidence levels, or synthesized decisions across roles.
Who is it for?
Builders creating multi-role agent systems for planning, GTM, or operations who need copy-paste protocol examples with realistic executive workflows.
Skip if: Single-agent coding tasks with no orchestration, or production systems that already enforce a formal agent framework with authenticated RPC between services.
When should I use this skill?
You are designing or debugging multi-agent handoffs and need consistent invocation, response, and chain notation across roles.
What do I get? / Deliverables
Agents exchange structured invocations and responses you can log, chain, and synthesize into a single decision record for the initiating role.
- Invocation and response message templates
- Documented agent chains for a business scenario
- Synthesis checklist for the initiating agent
Recommended Skills
Journey fit
Spans multiple journey phases - primary shelf plus alternate fits below.
Inter-agent invocation syntax is foundational agent tooling you define while building multi-agent products or internal copilots, even though the patterns apply later in planning and growth decisions. Protocol blocks like INVOKE, RESPONSE, and CHAIN belong in agent-tooling design before you wire orchestration into production features.
Where it fits
Define INVOKE and RESPONSE tags before wiring a CRO/CFO/CMO trio into your agent runner.
Model Q3 ARR targets with CFO runway constraints before committing to a pricing page experiment.
Chain CMO pipeline coverage math after CRO sets a revenue goal for the quarter.
Replay a planning chain when burn or close-rate assumptions change mid-quarter.
How it compares
A conversational protocol pattern library for agents, not an MCP server or A2A transport implementation.
Common Questions / FAQ
Who is agent-protocol for?
Indie builders and small teams designing multi-agent products or internal copilots where finance, growth, and product roles must invoke each other with structured context.
When should I use agent-protocol?
Use it in Build while designing agent-tooling; in Validate when modeling pricing and runway scenarios; and in Grow when planning pipeline, CAC, and channel mix with chained specialist agents.
Is agent-protocol safe to install?
It describes message formats only; review the Security Audits panel on this page and treat any live agent chain as untrusted until you redact secrets and validate outputs yourself.
SKILL.md
READMESKILL.md - Agent Protocol
# Invocation Patterns — Inter-Agent Protocol Common cross-functional patterns, with examples and guidance on when to invoke vs assume. --- ## Pattern 1: Revenue Planning Chain **CRO → CFO → CMO** Used when: setting revenue targets, allocating growth budget, modeling pipeline scenarios. ``` CRO initiates: "Planning Q3 revenue targets. Need financial constraints and marketing input." CRO → [INVOKE:cfo|What's our Q3 revenue target given current runway and burn?] CFO responds: [RESPONSE:cfo] Key finding: To maintain 12-month runway without new raise, Q3 ARR target ≥ $2.4M (+20% QoQ) Supporting data: - Current ARR: $2.0M, burn: $180K/month, runway: 14 months - 20% QoQ growth maintains runway; <15% triggers bridge discussion - Board expectation communicated as 25% QoQ Confidence: high Caveat: Assumes no new hires or major infrastructure spend in Q3. [/RESPONSE] CRO → [INVOKE:cmo|Given a $2.4M Q3 ARR target, what pipeline coverage and CAC should we plan for?] [CHAIN: cro → cfo → cmo] CMO responds: [RESPONSE:cmo] Key finding: Need 3x pipeline ($7.2M) and CAC ≤ $8,400 to hit $2.4M ARR target. Supporting data: - Historical close rate: 33% → 3x coverage required - Current CAC: $9,100 → 8% efficiency improvement needed - Recommended channel mix: 60% outbound, 30% inbound, 10% partner Confidence: medium Caveat: Close rate assumes no sales team changes; any rep turnover drops it to 25%. [/RESPONSE] ``` **What CRO does with this:** Synthesizes CFO constraint (target) + CMO playbook (how to hit it) into a revenue plan. Does not invoke further (depth limit reached). --- ## Pattern 2: Hiring Decision Chain **CHRO → CFO → COO** Used when: headcount planning, role approval, capacity vs budget tradeoffs. ``` CHRO initiates: "Engineering wants to hire 3 senior engineers. Need budget clearance and capacity validation." CHRO → [INVOKE:cfo|Can we afford 3 senior engineers in H2? Fully loaded ~$180K each.] [RESPONSE:cfo] Key finding: Budget supports 2 hires now; 3rd is contingent on Q2 ARR closing above $2.1M. Supporting data: - Current H2 headcount budget: $340K remaining - 2 hires = $270K fully loaded → $70K buffer - 3 hires = $405K → $65K over; triggers board approval Confidence: high Caveat: Based on current runway projection — fundraise close changes this completely. [/RESPONSE] CHRO → [INVOKE:coo|Do operations support onboarding 2-3 engineers in H2? Any capacity constraints?] [CHAIN: chro → cfo → coo] [RESPONSE:coo] Key finding: Can absorb 2 comfortably; 3rd requires dedicated onboarding lead or delays velocity 6 weeks. Supporting data: - Current eng team: 8 → adding 2 is 25% growth (manageable) - Onboarding bottleneck: 1 senior eng mentor per 1-2 new hires, currently at capacity - Dev environment setup: 3-week lead time per hire Confidence: medium Caveat: Assumes no concurrent product launches requiring full team focus. [/RESPONSE] CHRO synthesis: Recommends 2 hires now, pipeline 3rd for Q3 contingent on ARR milestone. ``` --- ## Pattern 3: Product Launch Chain **CPO → CTO → CMO** Used when: planning feature launches, assessing readiness, aligning go-to-market. ``` CPO initiates: "Planning Q3 launch of [Feature X]. Need technical readiness and GTM input." CPO → [INVOKE:cto|Is Feature X technically ready for Q3 launch? Key risks?] [RESPONSE:cto] Key finding: 70% complete; Q3 launch is achievable with scope cut — 2 items must move to Q4. Supporting data: - Core feature: complete; performance optimization: 3 weeks remaining - Infrastructure scaling: needs load testing at 10x current volume - Scope cuts needed: advanced analytics dashboard, third-party integrations Confidence: medium Caveat: Assumes no critical bugs found in load testing; historical rate suggests 1-2 found. [/RESPONSE] CPO → [INVOKE:cmo|Given Q3 launch of Feature X (core only, no analytics/integrations), what's the GTM plan?] [CHAIN: cpo → cto → cmo] [RESPONSE:cmo] Key finding: Core-only launch works for existing customers; ne