Centralized vs. Distributed Agents: Architectural Tradeoffs?

[jay-naylence]

Hi everyone,

I’ve been exploring different approaches to building multi-agent systems, especially as organizations move beyond single-agent copilots into more complex, distributed workflows. After working with Microsoft’s Agent Framework and also experimenting with distributed agent fabrics, I put together a technical comparison to better understand the architectural tradeoffs.

This is not a promotional post — the goal is to start a constructive conversation around patterns, constraints, and real-world requirements for agent systems at scale.

Some of the areas I compared:

Centralized orchestration vs. distributed agent nodes

Lifecycle management (state handling, recovery, fault tolerance)

Security models — identity boundaries, permissioning, and zero-trust assumptions

Agent topology — hub-and-spoke vs. mesh

Enterprise considerations like compliance zones, multi-tenant workloads, and integration boundaries

The full write-up is here:
https://naylence.medium.com/comparing-microsoft-agent-framework-and-naylence-centralized-vs-distributed-agents-3dafcb76f5bd

I’d really appreciate perspectives from this community — especially around:

Where centralized agent architectures excel

Scenarios where a distributed or federated approach becomes necessary

Any patterns you’ve found particularly effective for managing large agent collections

How you’re thinking about identity, handoffs, and coordination across heterogeneous environments

Would love to hear how others in this group are approaching these challenges. The field is still very early, and having more shared understanding would help all of us build better systems.

Thanks! , Jay