Route Method vs Terminal Method
Shared workspace vs full isolation. Same office vs different buildings. When to use each.
There are two ways to run multi-agent systems in OpenClaw, and choosing the right one depends on how much isolation your workflow needs. The route method (which you just learned) shares a workspace. The terminal method creates fully isolated environments. Both have their place.
The route method is like subagents working in the same office. They share the same workspace directory, the same memory files, and the same file system. The orchestrator hands off tasks within a single OpenClaw session. This is fast to set up, easy to manage, and works great when subagents need to read each other's output or share common resources. Most workflows should start here.
The terminal method launches each subagent as a completely separate OpenClaw instance — a new terminal, a new workspace, potentially a different model, different tools, different configuration. This is like subagents working in different buildings. They can't see each other's files. They don't share context. Communication happens through explicit file drops or structured output.
When do you need terminal isolation? Three scenarios: Security boundaries — when one subagent processes sensitive data that another shouldn't access. Resource isolation — when one subagent's file operations could interfere with another's. Model differences — when you need one subagent on Claude and another on GPT because they're better at different tasks.
The cost of terminal isolation is complexity. You need to manage file handoffs between workspaces, handle communication explicitly, and deal with the overhead of running multiple OpenClaw instances. The route method handles all of this automatically because everything is in one workspace.
The advanced pattern: most production setups use both. The route method for tightly coupled subagents that share context (researcher + writer working on the same content). The terminal method for independent workflows that shouldn't interact (production monitoring agent + development coding agent). Start with routes. Graduate to terminals when you have a specific isolation requirement.
Walkthrough
- 1Review your current multi-agent setup — are there any isolation concerns?
- 2Identify scenarios where your subagents need shared access (shared workspace is fine)
- 3Identify scenarios where isolation would be beneficial (different concerns, different sensitivity levels)
- 4Set up a terminal-method test: open two separate terminal windows
- 5In each terminal, start an OpenClaw instance with different configurations
- 6Define a simple file-drop communication protocol: Agent A writes to
/shared/output.md, Agent B reads from/shared/output.md - 7Run a task using the terminal method and compare the experience to the route method
- 8Document your decision criteria: when will you use route vs terminal in your workflows?
Checkpoint
You understand both methods (route = shared workspace, terminal = full isolation) and can articulate when each is appropriate. You've tested both and documented your criteria for choosing between them.