I keep reading threads about this and most of them show the demo, not the Tuesday morning. Here’s ours, no polish, then some questions. Six of us on a SaaS, twelve months of adding AI gradually. Early on everyone had their own editor and their own habits. Then we looked back and found we’d already converged on most of it, so we wrote it down. We didn’t force a single tool either. Some on Claude Code, some on Codex, some on Cursor, and I’m not going to fight that one. The process is shared, and the conventions sit in the repo’s AGENTS.md , which is the only thing we all read the same way. The flow is Matt Pocock’s skills, no forks. We start with grill-with-docs: the AI interviews us about the project docs. Weird at first when you’re used to asking the questions, but a lot of never-written-down stuff comes out. Then to-spec, and a human reviews that spec. It’s not a formality. With a bad spec, everything downstream is expensive work that goes in the bin. to-tickets cuts it into small tickets. Small tickets aren’t a rule we read somewhere either, we just notice the difference when we skip it. The agent works through them with implement, against the spec. We open the PR, CodeRabbit runs, the pipelines run. If everything passes and someone says yes, it merges. AI writes most of the code. We review the spec and the merge, and skip the line-by-line in between. Treating the spec as a contract has killed a lot of “that’s not what I asked for”. Small tickets keep the agent from wandering. Automated review before the human one takes the style and import noise away, so the person looks at what matters. What I didn’t expect is how much writing the process down helps when everyone has a different tool. Nobody argues about editors and the conventions don’t rot. Graph engineering to close tickets on its own, software factory style, we haven’t managed. Tickets go in and PRs come out, and the demos look great, but with our repo the quality isn’t there. We haven’t found the point where we’d be comfortable letting it loose, so it’s still an experiment. What I’d like to know: Where are your checkpoints between human and agent? Spec, PR, merge? Spec before code, or straight to tickets and prompts? Who reviews agent PRs? Do you read them the same as a human’s? One tool or several across the team? If you’ve tried more than one, is any better for certain kinds of tasks? What goes into AGENTS.md and what stays out? Do you measure anything, or is it all vibes? Review time, defects, DORA. If you’ve tried software-factory autonomy, did you get acceptable quality? On what kind of tickets? How do you bring someone new in, a junior say, without AI becoming a crutch? Tell me yours. Even if it’s to say we’re nuts. submitted by /u/ocebe
Originally posted by u/ocebe on r/ClaudeCode