When most people think about AI assistants, they imagine one omniscient system that can do everything. Ask it to write code, plan a trip, analyze data, draft emails — all in the same conversation.
I've found the opposite approach works better: multiple specialized agents, each laser-focused on one domain.
The problem with generalists
A general-purpose AI is like a contractor who does plumbing, electrical, roofing, and painting. They can do all of it — but probably not as well as the specialist you'd hire for each job.
With AI, the problems compound:
- Context overload — The more domains you stuff into one conversation, the more the model has to juggle
- Tool sprawl — Giving one agent 50 tools means it might reach for the wrong one
- Personality dilution — You can't be a friendly recruiter AND a precise code reviewer in the same breath
- Memory pollution — Project A's context bleeds into Project B
The specialist advantage
My recruiting agent, Spencer, has exactly three tools: web search, web fetch, and message sending. That's it. It doesn't need GitHub access. It doesn't need a browser. It just needs to find people and tell me about them.
Because Spencer's scope is narrow:
- Its system prompt is tuned for sourcing — Boolean search, location verification, profile parsing
- Its memory only contains recruiting-related context
- It never gets confused about what project it's working on
- It can develop “expertise” over time — learning what search patterns work, which companies to target
Composition over complexity
The Unix philosophy applies: do one thing well, then compose. Four agents × focused excellence beats one agent × mediocre everything.
And when you need cross-domain work? Route it through a coordinator. That's what the Main agent is for — the human in the loop who can orchestrate specialists.
The future of AI isn't one model to rule them all. It's teams of specialists, working together like a well-organized company.