Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Practitioner methodology report highlights new protocols for verifiable AI product delivery, indicating improved collaboration.
Vibe coding and agent “skills” packages make it easy to produce running software, but small product teams still lack verifiable criteria for declaring a requirement done—especially when success depends on runtime agent behavior, not only repository tests. This paper is a practitioner methodology report with instrumented transfer evidence, not a controlled experiment. We present a lightweight Loop model of human–AI–artifact collaboration and declarative closeout protocols that hard-block premature completion claims. Two protocol families are central: (i) delivery closeout (smoke tests, staged review, and explicit human override with cost accounting); and (ii) runtime friction measurement after a path “works,” using agent logs (tool-call budgets, forbidden bypasses, latency) until a friction index reaches zero. We report a longitudinal industrial case (RetailPilot, an anonymized e-commerce agent control plane) where loops emerged in practice and were later formalized, and we outline a transfer study via a portable starter kit and a second domain workbench (DomainWorkbench-PE, MVP reached; post-MVP auth/UX deepening ongoing). A sibling product (KnowledgeService, an anonymized knowledge/RAG service) adopted an even thinner seven-loop cut without YAML gatekeepers and now serves sample 2 as an ingested MCP data plane—evidence of graded portability, not a substitute for sample 2. We position related agent-skill methodologies as dev-time engineering workflows, complementary to—but distinct from—product delivery governance and runtime sign-off.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yisen Xi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: