As AI agents start handling development, testing, documentation, and research tasks, Im wondering how project teams should represent their work. Giving an agent access to a project is one thing. Treating it as an actual project participant is another. Id be interested in a workflow where: Agents can be assigned specific tasks Their activity and progress are visible Humans can review their work before completion Agents can work on multiple tasks in parallel Responsibility remains clear between humans and agents This is one reason Ive been exploring Sharkly. The idea of giving AI agents a more defined role within the project workflow is interesting, especially when several agents and developers are working together. For SpiraTeam users, would you give an AI agent its own task ownership and activity history, or keep agents purely as automation behind the scenes? en-US(C) Copyright 2006-2026 Inflectra Corporation.support@inflectra.com/Computers/Software/Project_Management//Computers/Software/Quality_Assurance/KronoDesksupport@inflectra.comhttp://www.inflectra.com/kronodesk/forums/threads120/Support/Forum/spirateam/issues-questions/3229.aspxthreadId=3229Dev luc (luc.dev01234@gmail.com)aiapi As AI agents start handling development, testing, documentation, and research tasks, Im wondering how project teams should represent their work. Giving an agent access to a project is one thing. Treating it as an actual project participant is another. Id be interested in a workflow where: Agents can be assigned specific tasks Their activity and progress are visible Humans can review their work before completion Agents can work on multiple tasks in parallel Responsibility remains clear between humans and agents This is one reason Ive been exploring Sharkly. The idea of giving AI agents a more defined role within the project workflow is interesting, especially when several agents and developers are working together. For SpiraTeam users, would you give an AI agent its own task ownership and activity history, or keep agents purely as automation behind the scenes? Tue, 08 Sep 2026 12:43:11 -04002026-09-08T13:00:41-04:00/Support/Forum/spirateam/issues-questions/3229.aspxmessageId=7713Victoria D (nino.diasamidze@inflectra.com) Hello, This is a genuinely interesting workflow question, and the tension youre describing is real. The case for giving agents explicit task ownership: Audit trail becomes meaningful - you can see what the agent actually did, not just that automation ran Human review gates make sense when theres a named owner to review against Parallel work is easier to track when each agent has its own task slice Responsibility is clearer - if an agent owns a task, a human owns the review The case for keeping agents behind the scenes: Most project management tools (SpiraTeam included) werent built with agent-as-participant in mind License models are per-user, so agent seats get expensive or awkward Stakeholders may not trust agent-attributed work the same way SpiraTeams API is strong enough to support agent participation without waiting for dedicated tooling. A practical pattern: Create a service account for each agent role (e.g., agent-qa-bot, agent-doc-writer) Agents log their own comments, status updates, and attachments via the REST API Tasks move to In Review rather than Completed - a human closes the loop You get full activity history tied to the agent account This gives you visibility and accountability without needing a dedicated platform like Sharkly. Regards, Victoria - Tue, 08 Sep 2026 13:00:41 -04002026-09-08T13:00:41-04:00/Support/Forum/spirateam/issues-questions/3229.aspx#reply7713