Linear

Saarinen writes that good software shows the fingerprints of its makers: what they chose to build, leave out, and keep polishing after it already worked. He says Linear runs on intuition formed by customer contact, not on process or data.

His worry is additive growth: features that work alone but weaken the whole. Agent-driven workflows could accelerate that.

The OP wants to know what workflows others have found — and confesses he hasn't hit flow state with an LLM the way he can hand-writing code. That confession becomes the thread's real subject.

Two camps form: builders showing off homemade orchestration harnesses (one runs three autonomous agents that open their own PRs), and skeptics arguing the flow loss is inherent to a passive 'manager' role — and that most orchestrators are just an elaborate way to burn tokens.