<rss version="2.0" xmlns:a10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Inflectra Customer Forums: Should AI coding agents be managed like members of an engineerin (Thread)</title><description> Imagine assigning an AI coding agent a bug that needs to be investigated every morning.  The agent can inspect the repository and prepare a report. But who checks whether the report is correct? Who decides whether a fix should be implemented? And where does the team follow the work?  This is why I think AI coding agents need to be managed within a clear project workflow.  A useful process could look like this:    A developer creates a task with acceptance criteria.    An agent receives the task.    The agent executes it in a configured development environment.    Progress and blockers remain visible.    A developer reviews the result.    The task is accepted or sent back for changes.    Scheduling can add another layer: recurring maintenance, code checks, or reports can be triggered automatically.  Sharkly.ai combines a task-management environment with Agents and Automations. It supports scheduled and event-triggered work while keeping people involved in review.  Would your team allow coding agents to execute tasks automatically, or would you require human approval before every significant change? </description><language>en-US</language><copyright>(C) Copyright 2006-2026 Inflectra Corporation.</copyright><managingEditor>support@inflectra.com</managingEditor><category domain="http://www.dmoz.org">/Computers/Software/Project_Management/</category><category domain="http://www.dmoz.org">/Computers/Software/Quality_Assurance/</category><generator>KronoDesk</generator><a10:contributor><a10:email>support@inflectra.com</a10:email></a10:contributor><a10:id>http://www.inflectra.com/kronodesk/forums/threads</a10:id><ttl>120</ttl><link>/Support/Forum/spirateam/best-practices/3305.aspx</link><item><guid isPermaLink="false">threadId=3305</guid><author>D Lucc (lucd180@proton.me)</author><title>Should AI coding agents be managed like members of an engineerin</title><description> Imagine assigning an AI coding agent a bug that needs to be investigated every morning.  The agent can inspect the repository and prepare a report. But who checks whether the report is correct? Who decides whether a fix should be implemented? And where does the team follow the work?  This is why I think AI coding agents need to be managed within a clear project workflow.  A useful process could look like this:    A developer creates a task with acceptance criteria.    An agent receives the task.    The agent executes it in a configured development environment.    Progress and blockers remain visible.    A developer reviews the result.    The task is accepted or sent back for changes.    Scheduling can add another layer: recurring maintenance, code checks, or reports can be triggered automatically.  Sharkly.ai combines a task-management environment with Agents and Automations. It supports scheduled and event-triggered work while keeping people involved in review.  Would your team allow coding agents to execute tasks automatically, or would you require human approval before every significant change? </description><pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2026 10:28:21 -0500</pubDate><a10:updated>2026-11-09T10:28:21-05:00</a10:updated><link>/Support/Forum/spirateam/best-practices/3305.aspx</link></item></channel></rss>