Boteam self-experiment
Self-experiment: how we run Boteam with AI agents
This website is built and operated the way the playbook describes: AI agents draft, a person reviews and approves, every fix becomes a rule.
What we do
AI agents draft the code, the copy and the research packs behind this site. Every change goes through human review before it ships; the repository history is the audit trail.
Content follows a written pipeline: research with sources recorded, an independent reliability check on every claim, and editorial approval bound to the exact revision. The guides that govern it are published in the repository.
What has gone wrong
Agents have drafted plausible-sounding claims with no source, invented design values outside the token system, and confidently “fixed” things that were not broken. The review step caught these — which is the point. Each failure became a written rule the next agent run must follow.
What this proves and does not prove
It proves one small operation can run an agent-drafted, human-approved workflow end to end — the same Every fix becomes a rule loop we recommend. It does not prove customer outcomes, and it is not a benchmark. It is one honest data point from our own desk.
Boteam self-experiment
We run this site the way we describe
This website is built and maintained by AI agents drafting code and copy, with a person reviewing and approving every change. The commit history and the published guides are the record.
What this does not show: Our own operation — one data point about our workflow, not a customer result.
Source: Boteam — Boteam self-experiment: rebuilding boteam.ai with AI agents under human review · Our own experiment, reported as such. Not a customer result. · Reviewed 2026-10-19
Related business area →