# Run agents as an engineering team where nobody approves their own work

> A former head of a 150-person engineering org reports that agents opened 1,363 of 1,575 pull requests over ten weeks. The setup works because the ticket is the spec and the test, and a separate checker signs off every change.

- URL: https://paperchasewebb.ai/bots/marketplace/items/run-agents-as-an-engineering-team-where-nobody-approves-their-own-work/
- Type: Agent use case pack
- Category: Solo business
- By: PaperChaseWebb
- Works with: Plain .md
- Price: Free USD
- Difficulty: Advanced
- Setup time: 1 hr
- Time to result: One working session
- Format: Markdown (.md) file, run-agents-as-an-engineering-team-where-nobody-approves-their-own-work.md
- Version: 1.0, updated 2026-10-26
- License: Personal and commercial use. Credit the original source when you share the workflow.

## What you end up with

Two rules carry most of the weight: the agent that did the work never signs it off, and every acceptance criterion needs evidence (a CI line or a screenshot).

## What you get

- A plain-language summary of the workflow
- A fill-in prompt template
- What to watch out for
- A link to the original source

## Who it is for

Builders who already use AI agents and want a proven workflow they can copy into their own project.

## Tools needed

- Coding agents: write the changes from tickets
- Reviewer agents: read CI, compare the diff to the ticket's criteria, take staging screenshots
- Kanban board: work in progress limit and a visible Blocked column
- You need: An AI coding agent or chat model
- You need: A small real task to try it on

Cost to run: Free with the agent plan you already use.

## How it works

1. **Rewrite your next ten tickets so each has numbered acceptance criteria.** Rewrite your next ten tickets so each has numbered acceptance criteria a checker can verify Expected: Done before you move to the next step.
2. **Give the writing agent and the reviewing agent separate prompts and se.** Give the writing agent and the reviewing agent separate prompts and separate permissions Expected: Done before you move to the next step.
3. **Require one piece of evidence per criterion: a CI result, a test name .** Require one piece of evidence per criterion: a CI result, a test name or a staging screenshot Expected: Done before you move to the next step.
4. **Cap work in progress and keep a Blocked column that a person checks da.** Cap work in progress and keep a Blocked column that a person checks daily Expected: Done before you move to the next step.
5. **Log cost per ticket and look at the slowest, most expensive tenth ever.** Log cost per ticket and look at the slowest, most expensive tenth every week Expected: Done before you move to the next step.

## Sample prompt: Workflow template (Coding agents, Reviewer agents)

```
Apply this workflow to [your project]:
1. Rewrite your next ten tickets so each has numbered acceptance criteria a checker can verify
2. Give the writing agent and the reviewing agent separate prompts and separate permissions
3. Require one piece of evidence per criterion: a CI result, a test name or a staging screenshot
4. Cap work in progress and keep a Blocked column that a person checks daily
5. Log cost per ticket and look at the slowest, most expensive tenth every week
Stop and ask me before anything irreversible: deploys, payments, sends or deletes.
```

Adapted by PaperChaseWebb. Not the original author's prompt.

## Free preview of run-agents-as-an-engineering-team-where-nobody-approves-their-own-work.md

````markdown
# Run agents as an engineering team where nobody approves their own work

PaperChase agent use case (free feed entry), version 1.0. Source: [u/Efficient-Trick-4384 on r/AI_Agents](https://www.reddit.com/r/AI_Agents/comments/1xfwwpw/i_used_to_run_a_150person_engineering_org_now/), 2026-10-26.

## What they did

Each ticket carries acceptance criteria that double as the test. An agent writes the change, and a different step reads the CI results, checks the diff against each criterion and attaches a staging screenshot per criterion before anything merges. Work in progress is capped at 15 items and blocked work sits in its own column where people can see it. They also track cost per story: a median of about $36, with one in ten stories costing over $147, and review taking about 11% of total spend.

## Worth knowing

Two rules carry most of the weight: the agent that did the work never signs it off, and every acceptance criterion needs evidence (a CI line or a screenshot). Tracking cost per story shows which kinds of tickets are worth giving to agents at all. Figures are as reported by the author.
````

## Worth knowing

- Two rules carry most of the weight: the agent that did the work never signs it off, and every acceptance criterion needs evidence (a CI line or a screenshot). Tracking cost per story shows which kinds of tickets are worth giving to agents at all. Figures are as reported by the author.
- Figures are as reported by the original author and were not re-measured by us.

## Questions

**Where does this come from?** A public post credited to u/Efficient-Trick-4384 on r/AI_Agents. Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/AI_Agents/comments/1xfwwpw/i_used_to_run_a_150person_engineering_org_now/

**Is it free?** Yes. Feed entries are free to read and download.

## How to get it

Free sample. Download it directly at https://paperchasewebb.ai/bots/marketplace/items/run-agents-as-an-engineering-team-where-nobody-approves-their-own-work/, no signup.

Seller: PaperChaseWebb Inc., mgmt@paperchasewebb.com