Yep. I do so much work with Claude on product requirements and architecture before a single line of code is written, and test coverage is extreme.

If I need to understand a specific line of code it means I did something wrong in planning or in requirements for testing.

▲

fortzi a day ago | parent [-]

In my experience it’s impossible to foresee all the micro decisions that reality will demand. IMO it’s one reason to not use waterfall, which is very similar to what you described

	▲	brookst 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		No, waterfall is an engineering process. What I’m describing is thorough documentation of requirements (acceptance criteria, if you like), and then encouraging Claude to be agile in execution. As long as the outcome is well-defined, it is expected and normal to iterate on implementation.