Yes. We rewrote our entire internal tools backend and frontend with Claude in the last 6 months. This was a tool with about 15 years of development by humans.
We did not rewrite our customer app but all maintenance and new feature code is 99% AI agent written and has been for the last 6 months.
You're not going to see us write a blog post about it though. We prefer not to tell our customers that the software they use is mostly AI written.
With what process, spec driven? Having AI produce all the code is pretty common. An agentic workflow operating at a higher level of abstraction especially for brown field is not.
The most important thing to this is people who have domain knowledge. The same leaders who built the original also built the new AI-written version. We know how it needs to work and we know when the AI goes off rails so we need to pull it back.
There was a front page post on HN here a few weeks ago where it said something like the moat is domain knowledge. It was true for us when we rebuilt the internal tool from scratch.
It’s also worth considering that a lot of this software will never be marketed, compared to in the past. For example, since it is now trivial to build a tool, why sell it? It is now economical to build a lot tools in-house.
Comments
Yes. We rewrote our entire internal tools backend and frontend with Claude in the last 6 months. This was a tool with about 15 years of development by humans.
We did not rewrite our customer app but all maintenance and new feature code is 99% AI agent written and has been for the last 6 months.
You're not going to see us write a blog post about it though. We prefer not to tell our customers that the software they use is mostly AI written.
With what process, spec driven? Having AI produce all the code is pretty common. An agentic workflow operating at a higher level of abstraction especially for brown field is not.
The most important thing to this is people who have domain knowledge. The same leaders who built the original also built the new AI-written version. We know how it needs to work and we know when the AI goes off rails so we need to pull it back.
There was a front page post on HN here a few weeks ago where it said something like the moat is domain knowledge. It was true for us when we rebuilt the internal tool from scratch.
I like the there is no benefit to talking about it for most companies angle, I didn't consider that
It’s also worth considering that a lot of this software will never be marketed, compared to in the past. For example, since it is now trivial to build a tool, why sell it? It is now economical to build a lot tools in-house.