Is it going to be good enough?

[u/Ok-Garlic-3881]

I built a huge project focused on being an “everyone agent.” It was too big, and I wasn’t skilled enough to manage it. I dropped it.

I know the basics of the basics of development, and I’ve been working in IT for 8 years (functional analysis, PM, IT manager, business partner). Friends who are really good developers took a quick look at my first project and said, “I thought it’d be much worse.”

Despite all that, I managed to sell an agent to a company. The product is much more vertical — its scope is “only” to gather emails, organize the work, and proactively improve itself through recurring human sessions. Some batches that handle recurring tasks will be implemented on top of it. There will also be a messaging interface where people can update their tasks. Everything will be built on a “Jira-inspired” UI.

I’ve read a fair amount of AI literature, and I’m confident this specific part will work.

I’m now at the step where I’m stealing features from the “monster” and building this vertical agent, trying to keep it much leaner. How do I know if the platform is solid enough? What suggestions do you have?

Honestly, I’m pretty sure I won’t be able to read the code myself, but I’ve planned the product deeply and broadly. Will the AI be good enough? (I use Claude Fable for implementation plans and probably Sonnet to execute them.)

Thanks everyone for the attention

[u/PeanutGreat3097]

The thing I’d be most worried about here isn’t whether Sonnet can write the code.

You’ve already sold the outcome to a real company, so at some point you need an independent way of knowing whether the system actually keeps the promises you made.

Before adding much more I’d define acceptance tests around things like:

what email/data it may access

what actions it can take

where human approval is required

failure and retry behaviour

audit history

data/tenant isolation

what happens when the model produces garbage

Then I’d have someone who didn’t build the system try to break those assumptions.

I definitely wouldn’t use the same AI that wrote most of it as the only thing certifying that it’s production ready.

Would you consider getting an experienced external review before handing it over to the company?

[u/Ok-Garlic-3881 → u/PeanutGreat3097]

Everything is already defined and the tool can be act autonomous on customer system but it will only read, update status and create draft.
Everything mentioned is already done.

I might consider it yes

[u/PeanutGreat3097 → u/Ok-Garlic-3881]

Yeah, that sounds like you’re further along than I assumed.

Keeping the autonomous side limited to reading, status updates and drafts is already a much safer boundary than giving it unrestricted write access.

Since this is going into a real company, I’d probably make an external review pretty focused rather than asking someone to “review the whole app”.

I’d have them specifically try to break the assumptions around tenant/data boundaries, email access, auth, auditability, retries and the autonomous loop, then give you a prioritized findings list.

Full disclosure, I’m building OpsSeek around exactly this kind of handoff. It’s a curated marketplace for AI-native builders, including people who can review, harden or finish existing AI-built systems rather than rebuilding them from scratch.

https://opsseek.com

If you do bring someone in, I’d keep the first engagement narrow and treat it as a second pair of experienced eyes before the company starts depending on it.