Tech leads and engineering managers

AI coding tools for tech leads

A team adopting AI coding agents does not have an individual problem repeated N times. Output rises faster than review capacity, and standards that lived in people's habits stop propagating — which makes shared config files, agreed approval modes and a review process that scales the three things worth settling first.

Last updated

What actually changes

Review becomes the bottleneck, not writing. When every engineer can produce a forty-file change before lunch, the constraint moves to who reads it — and a team that does not change how it reviews will simply merge less carefully.

Standards stop travelling by osmosis. A convention that used to spread through code review now has to be written into a config file every agent reads, or it will be silently reinvented by each of them.

Recipes for your stack

These are documentation pages. Some are free to read; the rest are part of the subscription.

Where you stand

Twenty-five questions on your team's AI engineering — shared standards, review-ready output, rollout — and a 30/60/90 plan you can run yourself. Free, no account.

Take the scorecard →

Frequently asked questions

What does a team seat cost?

Claude Team Standard is $25/member/month ($20 billed annually), ChatGPT Business is $25/user/month ($20 annually), and Cursor Teams Standard is $40/user/month ($32 annually). Compare included usage as well as seat price.

How do you keep standards consistent across a team?

Put them where every agent reads them: CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or .cursor/rules, committed to the repository. Anything that must happen every time belongs in a hook rather than in a convention people are expected to remember.