🔥
16h (edited) • General discussion
Claude Code Pro User Workflow
* Confidential. Use, Do not share.* Thank you!
Pattern from a real session this week.
When you're using AI to build AI tools, one agent is not enough. Self-review fails the same way self-driving fails: the thing that produced the error reproduces it during review.
The fix is three roles, not two:
The Executor does the work. Full autonomy inside clear rules. Stops only when it genuinely can't decide.
The Critic reviews the work. Same model, different posture: read, verify, find what's wrong, recommend PROCEED, FIX, or ASK.
The Operator (you) reads the critic's recommendation, not the raw work. Approves on PROCEED. Intervenes on ASK. Out of the loop on tactical review.
Bonus fourth role I didn't have a name for until this week: a Strategic AI in a separate chat, used for direction calls outside the work. "Are we in a rabbit hole." "Is this rigor right." Operates on the work itself, not in it.
The unlock isn't capability. It's posture. Same model, three system prompts, three different jobs.
1
3 comments
Claude Code Pro User Workflow
powered by
skool.com/ai-for-life-3967
Practical AI training for work and life. Hands-on lessons with Claude,
ChatGPT, and automation tools. Built for people ready to use AI.
Suggested communities
Powered by