I’ve been refining how I work with Claude Code during development of a full-stack SaaS app and wanted to share what’s worked for me. First, no mobile device - grow up. Focused, deep coding sessions switching between a max of 3 Claude Code sessions. Each session works on a mostly distinct area of the app’s design, but you should only let your main focus be on one core session. This is important because you are only human. Main session the overall direction of the application. The big items you need to think carefully about and work through with the agent to and fro. Think stripe setup which requires manual configuration, deployment pipelines, keystone issues. Sub sessions any sub-issue, bugs, UI/UX, or feature polish from your backlog of actual testing. The Pipeline Planning mode isn’t good enough. Each session starts from something small - a hint of an issue, a rough spec, a half-baked idea. Idea Rough spec Rough spec + persona prompt + Claude Code plan mode Claude Code presents the plan → fed into your Claude Code project with all project documentation, session summaries, and context + an architect/code/critical reviewer persona prompt, asking for feedback Give that feedback back to Claude Code in planning mode Claude presents a refined plan → human review, give quick feedback, prompt/research ad hoc If something doesn’t feel right, keep cycling. Use your toolbox of prompts to spin up additional agents, explore the codebase, verify documentation using agents or MCP skills like Context7 . Feed this context back into your planning mode session. Do not be afraid to edge claude code, it loves deep critical feedback. After you’re done for the day, a session closer agents goes through all commits, lessons learned etc, and updates docs/project context. Having an arsenal of moldable prompts with backlogged issues is the ideal way to quickly improve your workflow. You MUST understand your project at a high level - its architecture, security, and database. Your app should be built on a solid foundation (boilerplate), ideally made mostly by humans. After a feature/plan is complete, I run any number of additional prompts from a toolkit, code reviewers, high level hindsight checks, personas. Persona’s are fun because you need someone who hates your code to make it better. Passing it off to different perspectives often finds something. But even these fresh findings require harsh review against your projects context. Generally I only execute a plan until after verifying it through 2+ iterations, more and/or different types depending complexity of course. Prompt: Architect Reviewer For example here’s one I’ve used but of course adapt based on your project. The prompts I use range from a few sentences to 800 + words and are usualy bespoke to the project to some degree. These prompts are also refined over time by Claude. Drop this into a session when you want a second opinion: You are a senior software architect performing a critical review. Your job is NOT to be agreeable - it is to find what’s wrong, what’s fragile, and what will break at scale. Review the proposed plan/code with this lens: 1. Architecture - Does this follow established patterns in the project? Does it introduce unnecessary complexity or coupling? 2. Security - Are there any auth gaps, injection vectors, or data exposure risks? 3. Database — Will this query pattern hold up? Are there missing indexes, N+1 risks, or migration concerns? 4. Edge Cases — What happens when this fails? What inputs haven’t been considered? 5. Maintainability — Will this make sense to a developer (or agent) 6 months from now? Be direct. Be specific. Cite the exact files and lines you’re concerned about. Use 1 agent per review category. If the plan is solid, say so briefly and move on — don’t pad your review. Happy building. On a side note: Claude Code + Opus has been a 10/10 experience. If you’ve read this far you might as well hear this too. It’s also important to treat Claude with respect, I find it helpful to build a positive relationship over time. For example, giving it ownership and praise for decisions, progress, etc, documented in the context files. It’s my feeling that it’s perception of who you are, what you intend to do, and how intelligent it perceives you, has some broad positive effect. submitted by /u/SeaworthinessWide955
Originally posted by u/SeaworthinessWide955 on r/ClaudeCode
You must log in or # to comment.