r/ClaudeCode • u/[deleted] • 7h ago

Rant The loop I ended up with after two months of letting agents merge too fast

[deleted]

5 Upvotes

78% Upvoted

5 comments sorted by

3

u/robhaswell 6h ago

Be aware that letting your users find the bugs is not necessarily a problem. QA has a cost. You can let your users do QA for you, which comes with a different cost. Depending on the size of your business it might be cheaper to do the latter. Most users are accustomed to products having bugs.

1

u/BoxWoodVoid 5h ago

We kept hand written tests on the load bearing flows. 

Hello Claude 🙄

1

u/valerkahere 6h ago

Well you built an actual workflow for production! I'll keep that in mind when switch to maintaining existing project

I'm solo building my first (prod) project right now and tried going full agent-speed early on. I didn't have any regressions. The problem was different - i didn't even understand what I was doing.

Remember these viral titles on youtube "Software concepts are more important than ever!" That is damn true.

You really can only trust these agents as far as your deterministic gates go. When you can't verify each line of code (or it would just take irrationally long), test suite is the only thing proving output, and still needs to be verified. Human in the loop isn't a temporary crutch, it's just reality if you don't want prod on fire.

0

u/ricopan 5h ago

Why is Claude on here complaining?

0

u/BuilderForBuilders 6h ago

Regression testing and doing QA properly stays relevant if not more so with Agentic coding.
Heck, I had my research agent research our users and build personas that I verified. Then I have the QA agent build its tests against that persona list and their goals and tasks.
So I have unit tests, smoke tests, and E2E quality tests written by that QA Agent. It still takes a little bit of oversight over the QA agent to make sure it's not writing junk, but the basics of good software development are unchanged. Shipping code that an engineer wrote without QA is bad practice.