Questions
The ones we actually get asked.
Including the last one, which most companies leave off a marketing site. We would rather you read it here than discover it in week two.
Is this just waterfall with extra steps?
The artefacts look like it and the loop does not. Every document is drafted, criticised and revised in cycles before it reaches you, work routes backwards whenever a test or a security review fails, and a later meeting can open a dated change request against an approved scope. What is fixed is not the plan — it is that somebody has to agree before compute is spent on the next irreversible thing.
How is this different from pointing a coding agent at a spec?
Three ways. The specification is authored here from raw stakeholder input rather than brought by you. The approver is a client sponsor or delivery lead reading a Word document, not an engineer reading Markdown in a repository. And the gates suspend a durable workflow rather than prompting in a chat, so a restart resumes at the gate instead of losing it.
Does the person approving need to read code?
No, and that is the point. They receive a document — Word or PDF — with the requirements, the diagram and the traceability matrix. They can edit it and send it back, and the agents continue from their version. Reviewer accounts see only the project they were invited to.
Who owns the code, and where does it live?
Your GitHub organisation, under your branch protection, from the first commit. There is no export step because it was never anywhere else.
What does the agent work cost to run?
You bring your own model key or we pass the charge through at cost, so we make nothing on your compute and nothing on a run that goes long. Every project has a spend ceiling you set, the meter is visible while the work happens, and a run that reaches the ceiling stops and waits rather than half-finishing and calling it done.
What happens when an agent gets it wrong?
It depends where. A weak document is caught by its critic and revised before you see it. Failing tests and blocking security findings route the work back to coding with the finding in context. Anything the system cannot resolve arrives at a gate with the critique attached, because stalling the pipeline is worse than escalating a flawed draft to a person.
What is not built yet?
No bot joins your calls — transcripts are ingested rather than captured live. There is no mail provider yet, so invitations are sent by hand. Jira, Slack and Zoom are configuration fields with nothing behind them. GitHub is the exception and is fully wired. We would rather you read that here than discover it in week two.