CoAgent: Concurrency Control for Multi-Agent Systems
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Multi-agent LLM systems -- coding agents, devops agents, document agents -- now routinely run several agents in parallel against the same git tree, Kubernetes cluster, or document. As soon as two of them mutate shared state, they enter the regime classical concurrency control has studied for decades, but classical mechanisms fit LLM agents poorly. A single agent transaction spans minutes of inference, read sets are broad and opaque rather than statically inferable, and the live state agents act on admits neither fork nor buffer, so writes take effect the moment they execute. Locks block long inference intervals; OCC abort-and-retry discards minutes of work on every conflict. This paper builds concurrency control on a capability classical transactions lack: the LLM inside each agent can judge whether a conflicting write invalidates its plan, and can repair exactly the operations that depended on it. Control therefore turns advisory: the runtime informs, the agent repairs. Our protocol, MTPO (Monotonic Trajectory Pre-Order), fixes a serialization order at launch, serves each read the order-filtered value, and applies writes speculatively in place; a one-way notification asks an affected reader to re-judge and patch its plan, while the framework mechanically undoes and reorders misplaced writes through the saga-style inverse each tool registers in advance. At quiescence the run is serializable in the pre-decided order. We realize MTPO as CoAgent, toolcall middleware whose privileged ToolSmith grows footprint-declared, undoable tools online. On ten contended workloads, CoAgent stays within 5% of serial correctness at a 1.4× speedup and near-serial token cost, where 2PL and OCC surrender nearly all concurrency gains; on a bash-only target system, it grows a 25-tool library online and lifts the task pass rate from 45/71 to 63/71 at 0.80× the time and 0.86× the cost.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 10 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Jun 2026.
Builds on
10 of 51 references.
Closest ancestors · 3
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Multi-agent Collaboration with State Management19 May
- 2025CodeCRDT: Observation-Driven Coordination for Multi-Agent LLM Code Generation18 Oct
- 2023AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversation16 Aug
Other references · 7
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
- 2023SGLang: Efficient Execution of Structured Language Model Programscited by 1,141
- 2025SagaLLM: Context Management, Validation, and Transaction Guarantees for Multi-Agent LLM Planningcited by 60
- 2024WorkBench: a Benchmark Dataset for Agents in a Realistic Workplace Settingcited by 53
- 2024GoEX: Perspectives and Designs Towards a Runtime for Autonomous LLM Applicationscited by 23
- 2026S-Bus: Automatic Read-Set Reconstruction for Multi-Agent LLM State Coordinationcited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026When AI Agents Commit: Cognitive Serializability Across Data, Evidence, Policy, and Authoritycited by 2
- 2026Claim Plane: Enforceable Change Intents and Dynamic Scope for Parallel Coding Agentscited by 1
- 2026Claim Plane: Reliability Gains and the Limits of Selective Concurrency for Parallel Coding Agents: A 30-Pair, Three-Seed Confirmatory Study of Deterministic Pre-Write Admissioncited by 0
- 2026Stateful Governance for Concurrent Agentic Systemscited by 0
- 2026Stateful Governance for Concurrent Agentic Systems3 Aug 2026
- 2026Claim Plane: Reliability Gains and the Limits of Selective Concurrency for Parallel Coding Agents: A 30-Pair, Three-Seed Confirmatory Study of Deterministic Pre-Write Admission2 Aug 2026
- 2026When AI Agents Commit: Cognitive Serializability Across Data, Evidence, Policy, and Authority28 Jul 2026
- 2026Claim Plane: Enforceable Change Intents and Dynamic Scope for Parallel Coding Agents24 Jul 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Position: Multi-Agent Systems Should Prioritize Concurrency Control
- 2026Verified Detection and Prevention of Concurrency Anomalies in Multi-Agent Large Language Model Systems
- 2026TokenDance: Scaling Multi-Agent LLM Serving via Collective KV Cache Sharing
- 2026TomasuLLM: Out-of-Order Speculative Execution for LLM Agents
- 2026A Policy-Driven Runtime Layer for Agentic LLM Serving
- 2025ALAS: Transactional and Dynamic Multi-Agent LLM Planning
- 2026Token Coherence: Adapting MESI Cache Protocols to Minimize Synchronization Overhead in Multi-Agent LLM Systems
- 2026From Agent Loops to Structured Graphs:A Scheduler-Theoretic Framework for LLM Agent Execution