// Get info
Spec-driven development, explained plainly
Why is this better than prompting a coding agent?
You have seen agents code. The question is what they were asked to do.
A coding agent receives a prompt, improvises an approach, and hands back something that looks finished. Whether it is finished depends on who you ask, because the prompt never said.
What you want is a way to turn intent into software without managing agents one prompt at a time: the requirement written down, agents building against it, and the result checked against what was actually asked.
- No card required to watch the demonstration
- No migration; your current tools keep working
- No sales contact unless you ask
- You leave knowing exactly what the controlled path adds
Prompting moves the ambiguity downstream.
The prompt felt precise in your head. The agent guessed at the rest, the second run guessed differently, and the review became the real development loop.
There was no spec and no gate.
Shaping never happened, so the requirement stayed conversational. Acceptance criteria were never written, so done was decided by optimism. Every result needed a human to inspect it by hand, which is the work you were trying to remove.
The prompt stops being the spec.
The requirement is shaped first, agents build against approved criteria, verification checks each criterion with evidence, and the cost of the run is visible instead of discovered later.
The controlled delivery path
Do we know what should be built?
A shaped requirement: intent, constraints, and acceptance criteria, written before agents start.
Is it clear, complete, buildable?
The gate holds the requirement until every criterion is objective and buildable.
Can agents execute it coherently?
Agents build against the spec; every change stays traceable to the requirement.
Did the result meet every criterion?
Criterion-by-criterion evidence validates the result before it ships.
One story, end to end: the September security sweep
Watch one story cross all four stages; the cost and the outcome at the end are real figures from a September run.
A requirement entered, the gate held it, agents executed it, and every task carried completion evidence before the result shipped.
Sweep the open CVE alerts, shaped into a point-in-time security sweep with grouped, per-cluster filing.
The gate held the requirement until the sweep scope and filing rules were objective.
Agents executed the sweep and filed remediation tasks per cluster.
Every task carried completion evidence; the verified result shipped with per-task costs visible.
one point-in-time security sweep: 24 remediation tasks filed and completed by agents; per-task costs $0.09 to $1.50, average $0.29; September 2026
Outcome: 24 vulnerabilities remediated; 24 of 24 remediation tasks completed. Source: driftless platform usage data, September 2026
Single point-in-time sweep; excludes remediation work beyond the 24 filed tasks. Duration and human-involvement figures are not verified and are not shown.
Acceptance criteria validated against evidence artifacts on shipped agent work.
Inspect the orchestratorA real requirement-to-criterion-to-evidence chain, shown end to end in the demonstration below.
Inspect the orchestratorThe orchestrator is open, the architecture is documented, benchmarks are published, and the memory white paper is published.
agentic.ai score (21/36, evaluated September 2026)
Orchestrator Engineering notes Benchmarks Memory white paperDoes this replace my coding agent?
No. Agents execute the spec; the shape, gate, and verify steps wrap around whatever agents you use.
Is this heavier than prompting?
The gate is one checkpoint before execution; it replaces the manual re-verification that prompting adds after the fact.
What does a story look like end to end?
The demonstration below walks one story through shape, gate, ship, and verify with the cost and outcome visible.
The offer
- Bring
- nothing but a story you want to see end to end
- Receive
- one story walked through shape, gate, ship, and verify, with the cost and the outcome visible
- Duration
- the demonstration below
- Commitment
- none to watch; an account when you want to run your own
- Afterward
- you know exactly what the controlled path adds before you spend anything
- No card required to watch the demonstration
- No migration; your current tools keep working
- No sales contact unless you ask
- You leave knowing exactly what the controlled path adds
Want to see your own story run this way? Tell us where to look.
Something went wrong. Please try again or email us at sales@godriftless.ai.
Pricing
Start free. Scaling is priced per seat, after the evidence.
$100 per seat / month for your first 100 seats, then $70 per seat. Free tier to start.