We've started to be an early user in December and have since adopted it in a brown field codebase. I'd describe this as Lovable 2.0 or vibe coding 2.0.
The p0 workflow allowed us to delegate medium to complex full features to Claude Code while staying in lane with our standards. It allows us to go from idea to fully working prototype and PR within half and hour to hour, most of the time fully hands off.
PRs still need to be reviewed for production. However p0 allowed to drastically improve per engineer velocity, AI code quality and iterate faster with working prototypes and refinements.
Compared to Claude Code directly, which we also use heavily, p0 keeps very strong coherence from user story, spec planning, architecting, engineering and QA - across many several agents and subagents. Breaking down the work into sequential and parallel task. With Claude Code alone this would be usually requiring lots of hand holding, or be be only partially focussed, rest lost in the woods.
Also, we attempted to replicate some of p0 ideas with home grown software dev personas and workflows which fell apart. I think the strong point of p0 is that they really nailed the decomposition and software dev cycle with agents.
Really recommend to try, and at the very minimum you get to make your codebase agent ready if you haven't already.
The real unlock here isnt the multi-agent orchestration, its the standards layer. Every team ive seen try to scale AI coding hits the same wall: Claude is brilliant until it isnt, and it isnt brilliant when it doesnt know your patterns. A single CLAUDE.md ages fast and never captures the insitutional stuff that lives in senior engineers heads.
The 15 minute intervew to generate repo standards is the part id want to stress-test. Thats the moat, if it holds up. How does it handle standars drift as the codebase evolves? Does the agent actively flag when new PRs diverge from documented patters, or is it purely generation-side?
When you build features with p0, it suggests keeping the standards updated. We plan to tie this more into git hooks so that we can do this on code merges and not rely on it client side.
The standards are synced across the team but you need to use p0 to make full use of them, or at least re-import them into a custom harness.
Slightly disagree on the orchestration. It's not unusual for AI native solo devs to have some self-made harness, but most teams don't have that, and don't have the time to make one. Claude Code etc. only ships the primitives. With p0 you get one out of the box that we have been and keep tweaking.
Subtraction is the new addition.
As the cost of writing software drops, it’s so easy to just keep adding stuff. p0 takes kind of the opposite and refreshing approach. it forces you to focus on the fundamentals.
What should we actually build?
What’s truly essential and core?
What can we ruthlessly cut?
It directs you to think deeply instead of just vibing and shipping. Really appreciate that discipline.
I first tried p0 about a month ago. What stood out to me was the way the repo onboarding is designed. The harness puts you through a 15 minute Q&A to generate "standards" that it then keeps in sync with the codebase. IMO that is the best implementation of self-generating repo rules I have seen.
Sounds great! I heard about the product two weeks ago, but unfortunately didn't have enough information. This week, I received a request to build an interface as a non-technical person. I'm definitely going to try it with purple!
If the implementation is successful, I'll get paid. Wish me luck! :)
Sounds interesting, but can't find pricing information anywhere ?
Only:
> We offer a subscription model per team. Token costs for AI models (Claude, etc.) are paid directly via your own Claude subscription or API keys. Reach out for specific pricing based on your team size.
Worked great for me. Think about integrating the /counselors skill so you can fan out complex questions to multiple hq models across Opus, Gemini, and Codex. We're using it to do extensive design/performance/SEO audits that benefit from multiple smart opinions.
Let me just quote my original post :)
> We actually use Claude Code under the hood. What makes p0 different from Claude Code CLI / Conductor / etc. is our focus on shipping complex features autonomously, across all your existing repos.
In practice this means, you spend much more time defining coding standards and writing product and technical specs (our agents help you with both of course, but you bring the brainpower), and then you hit the button and let p0 build even some seriously large features.
Readit News
Compared to Claude Code directly, which we also use heavily, p0 keeps very strong coherence from user story, spec planning, architecting, engineering and QA - across many several agents and subagents. Breaking down the work into sequential and parallel task. With Claude Code alone this would be usually requiring lots of hand holding, or be be only partially focussed, rest lost in the woods. Also, we attempted to replicate some of p0 ideas with home grown software dev personas and workflows which fell apart. I think the strong point of p0 is that they really nailed the decomposition and software dev cycle with agents.
Really recommend to try, and at the very minimum you get to make your codebase agent ready if you haven't already.
The standards are synced across the team but you need to use p0 to make full use of them, or at least re-import them into a custom harness.
Slightly disagree on the orchestration. It's not unusual for AI native solo devs to have some self-made harness, but most teams don't have that, and don't have the time to make one. Claude Code etc. only ships the primitives. With p0 you get one out of the box that we have been and keep tweaking.
If the implementation is successful, I'll get paid. Wish me luck! :)
Only: > We offer a subscription model per team. Token costs for AI models (Claude, etc.) are paid directly via your own Claude subscription or API keys. Reach out for specific pricing based on your team size.
Is it "free" for single developer workflows ?
You can use any skill you’d normally add to Claude Code locally, so /counselors should work as well.
In practice this means, you spend much more time defining coding standards and writing product and technical specs (our agents help you with both of course, but you bring the brainpower), and then you hit the button and let p0 build even some seriously large features.