AI in software teams
Implement agentic coding in an existing team. Repository context, working rules, tests, code review and a pilot using real development tasks.
Discuss this service ↗30 minutes to discuss your needs and a next step. Work scope and pricing are agreed before we start.
Reply within 1 business day, scope and price proposal within 2 business days after the call, with the option to end the engagement after accepting the first stage.
Illustrative example
Each developer uses AI differently. Agents miss project standards, tasks need repeated corrections or generated code is difficult to evaluate. We review the workflow, repository and tests, then select representative tasks for a pilot.
We integrate tooling into the existing delivery cycle. Scope follows the repository, access requirements and release responsibilities.
We combine product development using agentic coding with software engineering, architecture and team leadership experience. The aim is a process in which the team can verify a change, understand it and maintain it.
We compare similar tasks: time to an accepted change, review rework and defects. Generated code volume alone does not measure value. We agree which tasks remain outside the agent’s autonomous scope.
The team selects a bounded change it can describe and verify, such as improving error handling in an existing module. It records current behaviour, completion criteria and prohibited access. An agent proposes a change, and a developer reviews behaviour, tests, security and readability. If the task is underspecified, we clarify it first. This is an illustrative pilot pattern.
We then compare time to an accepted change and revision count, including review effort. We document instructions for future tasks and assign someone to keep them current.
The business owner sets the objective and appoints a technical lead; following every code change is unnecessary. The lead provides tasks, access rules, test procedures and time to review results. We agree on data boundaries and acceptance criteria before the pilot. Timing and team involvement depend on repository condition and tool count, so we define them after a review.
This is an implementation in the team’s repository and workflow, with operating instructions and pilot results handed over. We need a technical owner, a test environment and time for joint review. Pricing reflects the repositories, tools and required changes.
FAQ
The service implements a working process in a real project. Operational handover is part of implementation; this is not a course.
Responsibility for accepting changes remains defined by the team’s process. Tests and review are part of evaluating agent work.
We begin with access rules and tool assessment. Data scope, permissions and repository use are agreed before the pilot; work outside the permitted scope stays with people.
A technical lead and reviewers for selected tasks are needed. The owner approves the objective and criteria; we agree on the time commitment after reviewing the project.
Reply within 1 business day, scope and price proposal within 2 business days after the call, with the option to end the engagement after accepting the first stage.
