The short answer is yes, at least initially. As to why, there was some animosity between Adams and Washington. Adams had famously made an ass of himself soon after the inauguration by trying hard to give the president a lofty title. Adams was adamant that the leader if the United States deserved a title of some kind, but almost no one else, including Washington agreed, even calling the suggestion "odious." Adams was also highly suspected by many to still be a monarchist, despite his denials. Added to this, Adams was not, and had never been a soldier. He had not suffered the same privations as Continental soldiers had, and in fact spent much of the war in Europe as ambassadors to various nations. So while he and Washington were both Federalists, and agreed on much, Washington initially didn't feel very trusting of him.

But it's also important to remember a fundamental fact surrounding everything in the new government: no one has any real clue what they are doing. They'd never had a president of VP under a constitution they themselves created. Adams doesn't know his role, and there's no precedent to instruct him. Same for Washington. Everything was fine a little at a time, and over the next few years, Washington grew more to include Adams, as many now began to understand the necessity of the second in command actually knowing what was happening. It's not until the 20th century that the VP really begins to be seen as a more advisor/compatriot role in which we see it today.