When one developer uses a coding agent, drift is annoying. When a whole team does, it's chaos: three people's agents each reconstruct "the plan" differently, build in parallel, and collide. The usual fix — more meetings, a frozen design doc — kills the speed that made agents worth using. The durable fix is a shared design source-of-truth that every agent reads and writes back to, so the plan is one living thing instead of N private guesses.
What "one living plan" actually needs
- One structured spec. Systems (Goal / Boundary / Acceptance) + milestones that any agent, on any team member's machine, reads the same way over MCP.
- Non-destructive proposals. Agents don't edit the shared design directly; they propose changes into an Inbox the owner adopts. No silent overwrites, no merge wars.
- Loop-back from real code. Each system maps to the files that implement it, so the team sees what was actually built vs designed — the doc can't rot.
- Ask over the real design. "What's the blast radius if I change the economy system?" answered from your actual systems, so parallel work doesn't blindside anyone.
Waterfall made agile
Classic waterfall failed because the plan was dead on arrival — written once, never updated, ignored by the people building. A living plan keeps the one thing waterfall got right (shared, explicit intent) while staying editable by everyone and every agent, continuously. That's the difference between a team reacting to whatever the agent shipped and a team steering it.
I'm building Forge for exactly this: an agent-readable design layer for AI-native teams. Agents connect over MCP, read the shared design, and propose changes back — so the team stays aligned and parallel instead of colliding. Open free beta — feedback very welcome.
Top comments (0)