Building Taktik with AI Agents (Literally)

I'm building a customer support platform, and my most consistent collaborator is an AI agent. That's not a metaphor. I'm building Taktik with AI agents — specifically Claude Code — as my primary development partner. Every day. On every feature.

This is what that actually looks like. The parts that work, the parts that don't, and what I've learned after months of building this way.

Building a SaaS with AI Agents: What a Day Looks Like

A typical morning starts with me describing what I want to build. Not pseudocode. Not detailed specifications. Plain English. Something like: "Add a Founding Guild landing page with a cost calculator that compares Taktik's flat pricing against per-seat competitors."

Claude Code reads the entire codebase. It understands our Next.js App Router structure, our Prisma schema, our component library. It knows how we organize files, how we name things, how we handle state. Then it writes the code.

Not a rough draft. Production code. With TypeScript types, proper error handling, and consistent styling.

I review everything. I test the result. I push back when something feels wrong. But the first draft comes from the AI, and it's usually about 85% of the way there.

Where AI Development Actually Helps

Code Generation at Speed

Taktik has over 60 Prisma models, 30+ API routes, and dozens of components. Building all of that as a solo founder would take years with traditional development. With Claude Code, I've shipped features in weeks that would have taken months.

The Founding Guild page is a good example. I described the concept — a landing page with an interactive cost calculator. Claude Code generated the full page component, the calculator logic, the animations, and the responsive layout. I made adjustments to the copy and fine-tuned the design. The whole thing shipped in a single afternoon.

PR Reviews That Catch Real Problems

Before I merge anything, I run the code through review. Claude Code reads the diff, understands the context of the change, and flags issues. Not style nitpicks. Actual problems.

Last week it caught a race condition in our Socket.io connection handler. Two events could fire in quick succession, and the second would overwrite state from the first. I would have missed it. It took me thirty seconds to understand the issue and apply the fix.

Architectural Decisions with Full Context

When I'm deciding how to structure a new feature, I describe the requirements and constraints. Claude Code suggests an approach based on how the rest of the codebase works. It maintains consistency because it has read every file.

Our features page lists capabilities across chat, collaboration, analytics, and billing. Each of those systems was designed with AI input on how the pieces should connect. The swarm collaboration feature, for instance, required careful thought about permission models and real-time state. Having a partner that understood the full schema made those decisions faster and more coherent.

What Doesn't Work

Honesty matters here. AI-first development has real limitations.

Product Vision Is Still Human Work

Claude Code doesn't know what to build. It doesn't understand your market. It doesn't feel the frustration of a support agent switching between five tabs to answer one customer question. That frustration is why I started Taktik in the first place — I wrote about it in From Frustration to Founding.

The AI can execute on a vision. It cannot create one. Every feature in Taktik exists because I talked to support teams, watched them work, and identified where their tools were failing them. The AI helps me build the solution. It doesn't identify the problem.

Code Review Still Requires Understanding

When Claude Code generates a 400-line component, I need to understand every line. Not skim it. Understand it. If I merge code I don't fully grasp, I'm building on a foundation I can't debug later.

This means AI-first development is not a shortcut around technical skill. It's a multiplier on existing skill. A founder who can't read TypeScript won't benefit from an AI that writes TypeScript. The review step is where quality lives.

It Gets Things Wrong

Sometimes the AI writes code that looks correct but handles edge cases poorly. It might generate a database query that works for 10 records but would be slow at 10,000. It might structure a component in a way that makes testing harder. It might miss a security consideration.

I've learned to treat AI-generated code the same way I'd treat code from a very fast, very knowledgeable junior developer. Impressive output. Needs supervision.

The Honest Math on Velocity

Before Claude Code, a feature like our analytics dashboard — with time-series charts, filtering, team-level breakdowns, and export — would have taken me two to three weeks working full-time.

With Claude Code, it took four days. That includes review, testing, and iteration.

That's not a marginal improvement. It's a fundamentally different pace. For a bootstrapped product like Taktik, that pace is the difference between shipping and stalling.

How This Shapes the Product

Building with AI changes how you think about what's possible. Features that I would have cut from the roadmap — because they'd take too long as a solo builder — are now feasible.

Taktik has SLA tracking, CSAT and NPS surveys, team-based routing, a knowledge base with semantic search, and a real-time collaboration system. A year ago, that feature set would have required a team of five. Today it's me and an AI agent, building in public, shipping every week.

That's not bravado. It's just what the tools make possible now.

What This Means for You

If you're evaluating support tools, you might care that Taktik is built this way. Here's why: a small team shipping fast means your feedback shapes the product directly. There's no roadmap committee. No six-month release cycles. If something is broken, it gets fixed this week.

Our Founding Guild exists because of this. Early customers get direct input into what we build next. Their problems become our priorities, often within days.

You can learn more about who we are and why we're building this. Or if you're a technical evaluator looking at our stack and approach, I'm happy to go deeper. That's the upside of building in public — nothing is hidden.

If this resonates, the Founding Guild is where the conversation is happening. The people who join now are the ones shaping what Taktik becomes.