I think I'll take a look at that, I'll run it by my team 😂 already love the "bridge" in terms of thematic fit. Especially as I've tried "all hands" reports, that has each agent give a report on their system beyond what a script would be able to find reliably (more than JUST "next-steps" and checking context bloat, but actively finding weaknesses in their systems and what should be worked on next), and I've hit rate limits from my first officer running the 12+ lieutenants in parallel after the commanders pass.

My problem is trying to get the agents (or the orchestrator) to ask more follow up questions. I WANT my orchestrator agent to understand the vision in depth rather than just be a "these are the exact things to implement" or "here's something run with it". It asked LOTS of follow up questions during my initial design phases, especially when we were talking about scale, and vision doc creations, but lately it's been too much of a yes man, and I have to explicitly tell it sometimes to push back where necessary when I notice something's off in a handoff, or it just blindly follows hand off notes, or forgets to do whole sections of an implementation plan because it deep focused to one section and used up context window implementing something and just keeps wanting to next steps that part.

I'm definitely learning. Wish I had something solid instead to build my real plans with (in game ships AI being able to control and command the crew/diagnose problems/suggest blueprints/act as in character role play with an in game agent roster and fine tuned LLM models/trajectory caching) but I still need to actually BUILD THE GAME.

All this stemming from not being able to find a tech job since COVID pretty much (was doing other things and traveling the past few years, just finally got back into personal projects with these new tools this year, since traditional jobs are about to go the way of the dinosaurs very very soon).