AI tools are great for individuals. but what about your team?
<p>Everyone on your team is using AI. Cursor, Copilot, Claude, ChatGPT. Individually, they work really well.</p> <p>But here's the thing. Every AI session is a solo conversation. Your teammate asked Claude about the error handling. You asked GPT to scaffold the API. PM used ChatGPT for the requirements. Three separate contexts. Nobody sees each other's work.</p> <p>PR review comes. It doesn't match what was discussed. "Wait, when did we decide that?" Rework starts.</p> <p>The problem isn't AI itself. It's that there's no team layer on top of it.</p> <h2> Why I started building this </h2> <p>I'm a product designer, been working in enterprise for over 10 years at places like Morningstar and JLL. I saw this pattern way before AI tools existed. Decisions live in Slack threads, Notion docs, som
Everyone on your team is using AI. Cursor, Copilot, Claude, ChatGPT. Individually, they work really well.
But here's the thing. Every AI session is a solo conversation. Your teammate asked Claude about the error handling. You asked GPT to scaffold the API. PM used ChatGPT for the requirements. Three separate contexts. Nobody sees each other's work.
PR review comes. It doesn't match what was discussed. "Wait, when did we decide that?" Rework starts.
The problem isn't AI itself. It's that there's no team layer on top of it.
Why I started building this
I'm a product designer, been working in enterprise for over 10 years at places like Morningstar and JLL. I saw this pattern way before AI tools existed. Decisions live in Slack threads, Notion docs, someone's head. AI just made the gap worse because now everyone moves faster, but in different directions.
I wanted to fix what happens between "we agreed on this" and "the code actually ships."
What Scindo does
It's a workspace where your team discusses, plans, and ships with AI agents in the same thread.
-
Chat → Agent and team discuss together. Edge cases come up in the conversation, not in PR comments later.
-
Plan → Agent drafts a plan from what was discussed. Team reviews it.
-
Build → Developer opens their editor with the plan loaded.
-
Ship → Agent opens the PR. Reviewer sees the plan and the code diff together.
There are different agent roles, Engineer, QA, Security, Designer, Product. Connects to GitHub, Jira, Notion, Linear, Figma. Works in VS Code and CLI too.
Pricing is per-workspace, not per-seat. Because the whole point is getting the whole team in.
Where we are
Three weeks since launch. Small group of early users. Free tier is 50 AI responses/month, 1 workspace, up to 3 members. Enough to try it on a real feature.
Curious how other small teams handle this. How do you go from "we agreed on this" to "the code matches what we agreed on"?
scindo.one
DEV Community
https://dev.to/oneslash/ai-tools-are-great-for-individuals-but-what-about-your-team-li9Sign in to highlight and annotate this article

Conversation starters
Daily AI Digest
Get the top 5 AI stories delivered to your inbox every morning.
More about
claudelaunchproductKnowledge Map
Connected Articles — Knowledge Graph
This article is connected to other articles through shared AI topics and tags.
More in Products
Security flaw in OpenAI s Atlas browser is a warning for all AI agents
A simple parsing error allows crafted URLs to become powerful, malicious commands that dupe AI browsers such as OpenAI Atlas. The post Security flaw in OpenAI’s Atlas browser is a warning for all AI agents first appeared on TechTalks .

Scientists Build Living Robots With Nervous Systems
Engineers have long tried to mimic life. They’ve built machine-learning algorithms modeled after the human brain , designed machines that walk like dogs or fly like insects , and taught robots to adapt, however clumsily , to the world around them. Now they are skipping imitation altogether. Instead of taking inspiration from biology, they are building robots out of it: fashioning tiny, free-swimming assemblages of living cells that organize into self-directed systems, complete with neurons that wire themselves into functional circuits. The result, reported last month in Advanced Science , is what the researchers call a “neurobot.” These living machines could help scientists better understand how simple neural networks give rise to complex behaviors, a foundational step toward building cybo


Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion
No comments yet — be the first to share your thoughts!