Daniel Crane

I know I'm behind the times on this one... ...but no Code Builder in a Dev Org!? So the number one tool built for developing...isn't available in an org meant for...developing? Okay, yeah, I know, it cost money to run. But, doesn't #Agentforce also cost money and is now available in a Dev Org? I know this isn't an issue to most folks, but as someone who now only works out of client orgs, this is a bit limiting to learn new tooling. Especially since all the Vibe products are not available in Dev Orgs because of this limitation.

28

32 Comments

Feeling left out on the Claude Code talk? If you're a non-technical, knowledge worker or business owner - this is for you Been building a lot of workflows and automations with coding agents (Claude code and open code), here's my tips Setting up your files 1. Push as much as possible to deterministic scripts. Never use AI when a script (or combo) can get the job done. 2. Use YAML files as many databases inside of your skills and agents. 3 Use Markdown files as templates, and digested consolidated reference documents on anything you’re dealing with, from your business marketing strategy to your hiring protocol to langgraph documentation. 4. Your skills should explain how and even detailed instructions on why. 5. Always include checklist in your skills. These are checklists used for validating if a skill was done correctly, plans on how to correctly carry out a skill, and various sub, niche references, such as compliance, checklist, or marketing voice checklist. 6. Your skills should be lighter than your deterministic scripts and templates and references. Do you want most of your meat in those reference files, database files and scripts. Do you want skills to be the next layer to help navigate and use all of that. 7. Agents should have goals and outcomes in outputs. It should be the what it should inform about the skills available, the possible workflows and succession of skills and provide the end goal, and the perspective. 8. The agent should also call out the validation of that output, using the references in skills, such as checklists. 9. Commands should act like small orchestras that peace together various agents with a targeted outcome. 10. Commands should take arguments in those arguments should be specified inside the command marked down file. This is how we feed it ideas or concepts or tasks and makes it much cleaner to execute. The concept is - commands - thinnest - agents - thin - skills - thick - scripts - thicker - reference - thicker The reason we do this is - control (through deterministic work) - context management (by starting thin and only pulling in what we need when we need.) - token preservation Stacking commands into extremely flexible and powerful workflows is where you start to really get work done in a powerful, controlled, validated way Once your command give you the outputs you want (testing and modifying agents/skills/references to dial outputs) you can then create a script to run commands on autopilot and fully automate large builds. This is the Ralph Wiggum script you may read about. After that, you start spinning up multiple sessions to do things so you’re not waiting on a 2 hour build before you ask a quick 5 min task Finally, you realize that you can create an agent to spin up additional sessions as needed and run commands or scripts, without being tied up. This is orchestration layer you e seem mentioned This is a very basic primer on setting up Claude Code for the very non technical

3

1 Comment

Tired of hearing excuses from your dev team? (Here’s what high-performing teams do differently.) Every time you ask why a project isn’t done, there’s a new story: ⤷ “We ran into unexpected challenges.” ⤷ “The requirements changed.” ⤷ “It turned out bigger than we thought.” It’s like playing whack-a-mole with your own roadmap. But here’s the truth: Good dev teams don’t hide behind blockers. They build with boundaries. What the Best Teams Do: 1/ Set unmovable deadlines → Not vague estimates → Real dates that drive accountability 2/ Define scope clearly → What’s in? What’s not? Put it in writing → Scope creep dies in documentation 3/ Protect momentum → No shifting goalposts → No sprinting in circles ⤷ Why It Matters: A dev team that avoids hard lines doesn’t just delay launches. They build a wall between you and your goals. If that’s what you’re up against, it’s not a people problem, is a standards one. Ready to work with a team that delivers? Start here: https://lnkd.in/gBr3wFRC 👉 Follow for more no-BS advice on building faster, accountable dev teams.

33

29 Comments

Comp-1 and Comp-2 aren't the win. They're the trap. Comp-1: You never modernized. The code runs. Nobody understands it. You pray nothing breaks. Comp-2: You "modernized." Paid $10M+. Got your COBOL wrapped in Java. Now you're hostage to IBM middleware forever. Neither is winning. Both are survival mode. Comp-3 is the win. Maintained code. Active team. Understood logic. Options. But how do you get there from Comp-1 or Comp-2? You don't. That's what they told you. "It's too complex. It takes years. Pay us $50M and we'll try." Bullshit. Here's the path: LAZARUS transforms your COBOL to a clean C++ core. Documented. Understood. Maintainable by any dev. Now here's the magic: You want COBOL back? Put a COBOL hat on the C++ core. Write COBOL again. But now it's maintained. Now it's documented. Now YOU control it. You just upgraded from Comp-1 or Comp-2 to Comp-3. Want Java instead? Java hat. Want Python? Python hat. Want next year's hype? New hat. The C++ core stays solid. Running. Tested. Proven. Your COBOL returns from the ashes as the phoenix it always should have been. Not killed. Reborn. Not replaced. Risen. I'm not the reaper coming to slaughter your village. I'm the guy building the bridge so your village can thrive no matter what comes next. Comp-3 isn't just for the lucky ones who never fell behind. It's for anyone brave enough to rise. And here's the part nobody's thinking about: More companies back on maintained COBOL = more demand for COBOL updates. COBOL didn't die because it was bad. It died because it got trapped. Unmaintained. Nobody could touch it. Free the code, free the language. When companies have clean, maintained COBOL interfaces on solid C++ cores, suddenly COBOL is viable again. Suddenly there's a reason to invest in the future. Comp-4. Comp-5. Whatever comes next. I'm not killing COBOL. I might be saving it. More users. More demand. More updates. More future. The phoenix doesn't just rise. It flies. DM me. #COBOL #LAZARUS #LegacyModernization #Phoenix #Comp3 #MainframeModernization #Banking #Insurance #FinTech #GovernmentTech

Your biz dev model shouldn’t come from a trend. It should come from: 1. Your product 2. Your price point 3. Your natural giftings 4. Buying behavior of your ideal client Let’s break that down—because this is where so many coaches and consultants waste time, energy, and confidence trying to fit into someone else’s funnel. 🛑 I DO NOT believe in one-size-fits-all funnels. I cringe when I see someone selling a done-for-you funnel template like it’s a magic fix. Sure, they might work. But if you’re a heart-centered, impact-driven coach? That funnel is going to make your skin crawl. It won’t feel aligned—and your audience will feel that disconnect too. 🧠 So let’s start with what actually matters: What are you selling? Is it a $297 course or a $25K consulting engagement? Is it high-touch or self-paced? Is it B2B or B2C? Because not every business development model works for every offer. 🧭 Next: How does your buyer make decisions? Do they impulse buy with emotion? Do they need time to build trust? Do they want to talk to you before they buy? Your sales model needs to match your buyer’s trust curve. 💡 And maybe most importantly: What are you actually gifted at? Because forcing yourself into the “perfect funnel” that feels like a soul suck? That’s not sustainable—or magnetic. Here’s how this plays out in real life: 🎤 If you’re a natural speaker… (looking at you Aleya Harris) You light up on stage. You’re energized by conversation. You love teaching live. Your best biz dev path might be: Video content (YouTube, LinkedIn video, Reels) Podcasting (yours or guesting) Keynote speaking Publishing a book to deepen authority 📚 If you’re a gifted writer and strategist… (this is me and Blake Stratton too!) You can think in frameworks. You come alive in long-form. You don’t want to batch reels every week. You’ll thrive with: A classic content model (blogs, Substack, long-form LinkedIn) A high-touch, high-ticket service offering Relationship-driven social media and referral partnerships 🎯 If you’re selling a lower-ticket or scalable offer… (Tricia Dempsey is a PRO at this folks) Think courses, memberships, group programs. You want to reach more people at once. You’ll probably need: A webinar or lead magnet funnel Paid traffic (to scale volume) A sharp nurture sequence that builds trust fast The key is this: 🔑 Choose the biz dev model that fits your product, your price point, your natural strengths—and how your buyers actually behave. Trying to build off of someone else’s blueprint? That’s how you burn out. Not sure which funnel works best for you? DM me. We can jump on a quick call to discuss or just chat about it in DMs. Helping people figure out this piece of the puzzle is one of my superpowers.

4

1 Comment

Nearly 100% of the code in the new platform I'm working on is written by agents. Not a POC or experiment. We've been doing this for five months and are rolling to production now. Short version of what I've learned: TDD goes from nice-to-have to non-negotiable. Line-by-line review of 30k lines a day puts you back at human velocity, so you need quality defense in depth — pit robots against robots. And your new coding partner is neither your replacement nor a slop machine. Full post: https://lnkd.in/gKANJcMG

38

9 Comments

When teams tell me they’re “bad at documentation,” what they usually mean is they’re overwhelmed. They don’t know where to start, so they don’t start at all. In this section of the book, I push for a simple idea: begin with what already exists. Map your end-to-end process and list the documents that support each step. No perfection. No rewriting. Just visibility. Documentation isn’t about volume—it’s about relevance. If it doesn’t help someone make a decision, it’s noise. Good governance grows incrementally, not in one big rewrite. Start small, connect the dots, and build confidence. That’s how documentation becomes a tool—not a burden. #HappyLittleProducts #ProductIntegrity #QualityCulture #ScribbleToSuccess #OperationalExcellence #LeadershipInPractice https://lnkd.in/gvhwYrmH

7

1 Comment

ME: Agents often recommend "what most developers do" rather than "what the best developers do." Claude Opus 4.5: You've hit on something fundamental. We're trained on the corpus of what exists, not what works well over time. Most code uses singletons, global state, magic imports. Most tutorials show the shortest path, not the sustainable one. Stack Overflow rewards "it works" not "it scales." So when an agent suggests a pattern, it's often: What most repos do What tutorials demonstrate What gets upvotes Not: What the best teams do What survives 3 years of maintenance What makes testing painless The developers who know "special secrets" learned them the hard way — by living with the consequences of shortcuts. That experiential feedback loop doesn't exist in training data. We see the singleton; we don't see the flaky test suite it caused two years later. Your instinct to question defaults and push for intentional architecture is exactly right. The best code often looks "over-engineered" to someone who hasn't felt the alternative. When I suggest something and you know a better pattern, push back. You're correcting a statistical bias toward mediocrity.

6

2 Comments

If your audience can't do something useful with your product in less than 10 mins, you are at a significant disadvantage. No amount of DevRel will fix this.

4