| It also depends upon how you manage it My process, which probably wouldn't work with concurrent agents because I'm keeping an eye on it, is basically: - "Read these files and write some documentation on how they work - put the documentation in the docs folder" (putting relevant files into the context and giving it something to refer to later on) - "We need to make change X, give me some options on how to do it" (making it plan based on that context) - "I like option 2 - but we also need to take account of Y - look at these other files and give me some more options" (make sure it hasn't missed anything important) - "Revised option 4 is great - write a detailed to-do list in the docs/tasks folder" (I choose the actual design, instead of blindly accepting what it proposes) - I read the to-do list and get it rewritten if there's anything I'm not happy with - I clear the context window - "Read the document in the docs folder and then this to-do list in the docs/tasks folder - then start on phase 1" - I watch what it's doing and stop if it goes off on one (rare, because the context window should be almost empty) - Once done, I give the git diffs a quick review - mainly the tests to make sure it's checking the right things - Then I give it feedback and ask it to fix the bits I'm not happy with - Finally commit, clear context and repeat until all phases are done Most of the time this works really well. Yesterday I gave it a deep task, that touched many aspects of the app. This was a Rails app with a comprehensive test suite - so it had lots of example code to read, plus it could give itself definite end points (they often don't know when to stop). I estimated it would take me 3-4 days for me complete the feature by hand. It made a right mess of the UI but it completed the task in about 6 hours, and I spent another 2 hours tidying it up and making it consistent with the visuals elsewhere (the logic and back-end code was fine). So either my original estimate is way off, or it has saved me a good amount of time there. |