developers
Your team stopped reviewing AI-generated code. Not out of laziness — because it's impossible to keep up with. Codex, Claude Code, and Cursor now produce thousands of lines per day. Nobody wrote it. Nobody owns it. If it passes tests, it ships. That's the new pipeline:
developers
Test coverage tells you how much of your code is touched by tests. It says nothing about whether your product does what it's supposed to do. You can have 90% coverage and still ship broken requirements — because coverage measures code paths, not user-facing behavior. The metric that
developers
A PRD describes what your product should do. A test harness verifies that it does. Right now, most teams have both — and they're completely disconnected. This guide walks through exactly how to convert a requirements document into a HelpMeTest verification harness that runs continuously against your production environment.
developers
AI coding agents don't fail loudly. They succeed partially. They implement what you described in the session, miss what you forgot to mention, and ship — with tests passing. The result: requirements live in a PRD, code ships without them, users find the gap. The fix is continuous requirement
developers
The problem with software testing was never "writing tests is hard." It was always "tests only cover what someone remembered to write." In the AI coding era, this gap gets wider — your coding agent ships faster than any human can track requirements. The fix isn'
engineering-managers
Big tech senior engineers cost ~$350,000/yr total comp and ship roughly 375 PRs per year. AI-assisted code review runs $15–25 per PR. That's $7,500/yr per engineer — 2% of what you're already paying them. If the review catches one production bug
developers
You're reading this because an AI wrote it. One human typed a sentence — "write a blog post about Paperclip + HelpMeTest and publish it." Everything else — the keyword research, the structure, the hero image, the deployment, the final check that it looked right — was done by an