A repeatable workflow for your coding agents.
The agent can write code, but someone still has to reconstruct the task, repair its environment and work out whether the result is safe to merge. Start with one repository and the work your team repeats.
Fixed price, agreed before any work starts. Tell me what you’ve built and I’ll reply with a quote.
Tell me what you builtWho it is for
For small software teams and agencies already using coding agents. Best suited to a team with an existing repository, a technical owner and recurring development work. It is a poor fit when the problem is an undefined product, missing requirements or an expectation of unattended production access.
What you get
- Repository context, setup commands and checks tied to the agreed task
- Preview, review and access boundaries
- A demonstration and operating notes
How the work runs
Agentic engineering setup connects repository instructions, development tools, automated checks and human review around a real software task. The aim is a workflow another team member can run and maintain.
First, establish the current baseline: what runs, what fails and where someone intervenes. Then configure only the context and tooling needed for an agreed task. Run that task through the workflow and review the actual result with its technical owner. A repository pilot is scoped in writing; larger rollouts are quoted.
When a check fails
A failed check returns a specific repair task. Retries are bounded; unresolved failures stop the change from advancing. Production access and release decisions remain with the people authorised to make them.
What it is not
I do not take unattended production access. It is a workflow setup rather than a product definition or requirements exercise. Release decisions stay with the people authorised to make them.
See the approach
BESF: the original build-and-check case study. BESF documents local checks. It does not establish a customer engagement or prove your repository will behave the same way.