My Seven Claude Code Subagents Did the Easy Part
Alireza Rezvani
SubscribeSign in
My Seven Claude Code Subagents Did the Easy Part<br>I built a Claude Code team to plan a SaaS in an afternoon. Then I sat with the two jobs no agent will take off my hands.
Alireza Rezvani (Reza)<br>Jun 03, 2026
Share
Running 7 subagents in Claude Code like a team | Image: GPT Pro © Alireza Rezvani<br>By four in the afternoon the room had gone quiet. Six agents had handed back their work and gone still, the way they do, and I was looking at a merged document that read as finished and wasn’t.<br>The product agent had drawn a tidy little MVP. The backend agent had designed a data model that quietly assumed a feature the product agent had already cut. Neither of them noticed. Why would they. They never met.<br>That contradiction was the most useful thing on my screen, and nothing in the stack could resolve it. That part was left for me.<br>I published the clean version of this last week on Medium: the seven roles, the configs, the eight steps, the whole blueprint laid out so you can run it yourself. This isn’t that. This is the part I cut because it didn’t fit a how-to. What the afternoon actually feels like once the novelty wears off, and the thing I’ve started to believe about where the work went.<br>Short version: the agents took the easy eighty percent. The hard twenty sits exactly where it always did, and now I’m alone with it earlier in the day.<br>Quick context, then the part that stung
In case you skipped the Medium piece. Instead of opening one chat and asking a single model to research the market, design the screens, plan the backend and write the launch copy in one breath, I run seven Claude Code subagents, each in its own context window. One role each. One artifact each.<br>One lane they are not allowed to leave. The researcher never picks button colors. The reviewer never writes the thing it reviews. You get seven sharp perspectives instead of the blurry median of one model trying to be all of them at once.<br>It works. I’m not walking that back. Planning a tool called StandupScribe, which turns a day of Slack noise and git commits into a clean async standup, went from a fogged-over week of role-switching to one focused afternoon.<br>The launch agent even handed back a one-liner sharper than mine: “Async standups, without the standup.”<br>So the team is real. Here is what the blueprint leaves out.<br>Alireza Rezvani is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Subscribe
Six of the seven are now commodity
I can say that without flinching because it’s just true. Market research, a scoped MVP, a component tree, a data model, launch copy. A capable model on a fast setting produces a solid first draft of any of those while you refill your coffee. The “process” I used to quietly take pride in mostly evaporated this year. If the artifact has a known shape, an agent fills it.<br>The value didn’t vanish. It moved. It pooled in the places the team can’t reach. The merge, first. Then whatever happens after you ship.<br>Start with the merge, because it’s the one that caught me off guard. When the product agent’s scope contradicts the backend agent’s data model, that contradiction isn’t a flaw in the workflow. It’s the workflow earning its rent. On StandupScribe the seam was small and perfect: the backend agent, left alone with the problem, had added a confidence score to every detected blocker so a shaky one gets flagged for a human instead of broadcast.<br>The product agent, equally alone, had speced the simplest possible loop: detect, post, done. Both were right inside their own lane. Only one of them could survive contact with the other, and choosing which one is the entire product decision. That choice is the judgment. It lives precisely in the gap where two isolated agents can’t see each other.<br>I get that merge wrong about as often as I get it right on the first pass. Twenty-plus years of shipping software, a lot of it in MedTech where “mostly works” doesn’t clear the bar, and I still sit there some afternoons moving the contradiction around until it gives. No agent shortened that hour. The team just walked me to it faster.<br>The part I’m least comfortable saying
Now the after, which undercuts the shiny version of the story, so I’ll just say it plainly.<br>Building got cheap this year. Genuinely cheap. A solo agent stack runs a few hundred dollars a month against what used to need a funded team and a quarter of runway. That’s the line everyone’s repeating, and it’s accurate.<br>Here’s what doesn’t make it into the thread: fewer than three percent of bootstrapped SaaS ever cross roughly a million in annual revenue, and not one of my seven agents lifts a finger on that number. They compressed the first messy chunk of thinking. They did nothing for distribution, which is where almost all of these die quietly.<br>So the afternoon buys me a better starting line. It does not buy me a single...