In real life the only time I saw somebody try this "multiagentic coding" the results were...underwhelming.
And there is one notable anecdotal source proving that it is possible - https://ideas.fin.ai/p/2x-nine-months-later
"Productivity is the efficiency with which resources (like time, labor, and capital) are converted into useful goods and services"
So they increased productivity "number of PRs". Shipping more does not guarantee shipping better or more impactful features. Many orgs are constrained by product decisions, not engineering speed.
If there was so much value to unlock through AI then why did Intercom/Fin sell to Salesforce?
ref: https://www.salesforce.com/news/press-releases/2026/06/15/sa...
I genuinely think that multi-agent is a probable future to enable coding at the scale of a big corporation.
I agree and I did not see it work yet, but the trial were most likely on small scale where it is simply over engineering.
(Btw : I do not sell tokens. I I think distributed the work through agents in a plateform is a way to control costs by optimizing specialised agents)
What do our teams look like now?
But I have some big concerns with your approach here. This post is written like an authoritative summary but you admit it's not been seen working. Why is there so much untested conjecture presented as best practice here? If you had tested it you would realize this proposal is not possible in most orgs. Their "platform" will not be extensive enough to prevent misshaps by teams comprised of non engineers.
I don't think you should avoid sharing it in any forum. Like I said it seems like a reasonable idea but I would just suggest being very I suppose blunt in 2026 because people skim and won't read things thoroughly. I would preface the article with "this is not battle tested"
Lest someone be frustrated when their stream aligned team accidentally exposes your whole company's email addresses on their new web app that whoops they forgot put it behind a login.