ES

🇸🇪
Here for SEO | Niche Sites | FPL

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@FPL_Jabroni On WC should be added 👀

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@FPLfrasier @FPL__Fran This 👆

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@fplcopilot Here is my team with a planned WC4 or WC6, what transfers would you make?

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@FPL_Architect Varför Wildcard nu och inte inför GW4?

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@Setentia2022 @Jalkemo Osimhen

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@dempastrom @Satreeee Vi är i Sverige, högt i tak osv

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@CharlieVantFPL Great work @CharlieVantFPL

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@FPLDalahast1 Värt det

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@FPLGOAT7 How do you feel about Gibbs-White?

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@KFswed @MartinAslund Har det alltid varit

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@Crillekung @MartinAslund Nobels fredspris till Deschamps? Utveckla gärna

[Jamon @jamonholmgren]

I'm just going to dump my whole agentic setup out here, because I see too many people missing giant chunks of this and it's hurting them.

Here's what I have and recommend:

0. an AGENTS.md that is a router -- it sends the agent to the right skills, docs, tools

1. a standard workflow doc/skill customized to my needs ... (grab Matt Pocock skills if you don't already have something) ... I tag this in most sessions with `@/AGENT_WORKFLOW.md` and it pulls it in.

2. self-healing docs for every system, and agents are instructed to keep them updated ... I tag the ones I know I need, or let the agent find them through AGENTS.md ... I also provide a more detailed summary in the first 7 lines of every doc, so they're easily greppable to find the right thing, and this is documented in AGENTS.md

3. agents always run the app ... the agent should always actually run the app itself, and test its work and fix issues as it goes, especially if running autonomously / asynchronously

4. end-to-end tests and instructions to write more and keep up to date, and docs on how to write tests, what to avoid, and a list of all the tests and what they test in yet another markdown doc ... write and run targeted tests during implementation, improve and commit with work

5. custom linters at precommit hooks looking for any problems you run across, with `--fix` fixing the problems automatically, OR if that's not feasible, it shells out to a cheaper LLM like Composer 2.5 or Sonnet to fix the problems -- NOT just flagging them, but actually resulting in cleaned code

6. cross-agent review at each major point: research, plan, implementation, and wrap-up. I mean codex, claude, cursor, whatever -- but it shouldn't be the same model reviewing the same code. And specific docs for agent review, what to look for, how to approach it. Also, personas -- looking at the code from different perspectives, such as maintainability, code quality, security, performance, AI smells, domains (e.g. "financial services expert" or whatever) ... and each persona also "owns" a set of system docs too and keeps them up to date

7. agent traces / worksheets that track what the agent is doing each session. if the agent fails partway through, you should be able to hand this worksheet to another agent and it could finish the job. commit this worksheet with the work so it's all connected and easy to reference later (you will reference these later!!), also have the agent apply git tags that correspond to specific worksheet names so they're easy to find

8. automatic agent feedback to you at the end of the session, added to a doc that is also committed with the work, that you periodically ingest into an interactive session and improve your workflows

9. a tools or bin folder that contains python or bash scripts that the agent has skills to make to make its job easier (for example, I have an `agent_review` bash script that lets the agent kick off agent reviews via CLI without knowing each agent's particular incantations) ... docs on how to make scripts effectively, and instructions to constantly build these out more

10. periodic agent sweeps through recent commits, looking for problems / gotchas from a higher level across commits

11. a coding conventions doc that is just for specific coding conventions you want to see in the code base, your review agents use these a lot (but a lot of this should be in linters)

12. an agent loop / night shift skill for autonomous work, that lays out how the agent is to approach this, from an orchestration standpoint

13. a task queue that is accessible to the agent (mine is just a TODOS.md, but yours might be in Linear etc, with a CLI to fetch via API)

14. a periodic false-confidence test audit skill that looks for tests that aren't actually testing what you think they're testing, and that fix those

15. visual regression tests -- take screenshots, compare via tool and with agent visual review, commit with work (git lfs useful here) or at least push into the PR

16. automatic performance benchmark tests that notice when performance degrades

17. performance profiling tools that can be used by agents for targeted benchmarking, trying new techniques, comparing outputs, and comparing profiles

18. end-of-shift full validations, including running all tests, performance, agent reviews, sweeps, everything -- when you return, it's all as pristine as it can be

If you have all this, your agentic coding experience is going to be very different than dry prompting and manually guiding it toward the right thing every time.

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@P_M_Roma @GustenDahlin

[Jamon @jamonholmgren]

The things that have worked the best for me to keep Claude etc from writing complete trash code.

(This assumes you’re using the top models at medium to high reasoning, and paying $200+/mo for a good plan, not $20.)

1. Excellent test suite that the agent has to run and fix if anything is broken, and write its own tests. By far the best way to improve outcomes. Also include linting, type checking, compiling, other static analysis tools and validations, and even access to a debugger if I can make it happen.

2. Excellent docs covering systems, code style, testing strategies, and more that I hand-wrote initially and that the agent has to keep up to date with every commit / PR.

3. An opinionated and carefully curated code base with well-named functions/classes/filenames, small files, extremely flat folder structure, and an AGENTS md that indexes and describes each concisely. Don’t let the intoxicating speed let this get out of hand. You’ll pay for it.

4. Review agents, using codex to review Claude and vice versa. I have Claude spawn codex reviews via CLI and it works super well. Also add in review checklists that it has to use before it’s done.

5. Well-written specifications that I hand-write and take my time on.

6. Review every line of every change that it makes and update docs, tests, or how I write specifications to ensure problems never happen again.

7. Run the agents at night so I am forced to improve everything above this one in order to not wake up to slop.

8. Be willing to hand-write features and bug fixes from time to time to make sure you stay in tune with the code base.

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@Marcusthapper Jag har något för dig

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@jamonholmgren Really interesting Jamon! Any chance you would like to share the template/prompt for this step?

And the step 7 in the night shift, the sub-agents as critical reviewers (review agents)

I really like the approach with day / night shift and would like to get started

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@Investacus @alden_niklas Är det gränsen för dyrt, om folk har råd eller ej.

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@jnunemaker /tdd from @mattpocockuk

[ES @emsegerlnd]

@andre_mc @GustenDahlin, nu snackar vi