The Squad
CONTROL PLANE · MOCKUP · v3
Operating view
THU · APR 23 · 11:42 CT
1 AGENT LIVE · 0 INCIDENTS

You're running a nine-person organization — without nine paychecks.

One agent deployed. Eight designed. At full roster, 20–30 hours of your week go back to you. Phase 1 ships May 5.

Time returned
4h / wk
↑ projected 28h at full roster
Bugs prevented
2
both caught by Audra
Monthly burn
$21/mo
→ $85 at full roster
Revenue potential
$2.5k/mo
⏱ 3 clients by Q4
Mission

Where we're going 3 of 5 milestones active

Legacy Pilates
CLIENT_01 · LIVE
675 members · 5,467 bookings
$0 · anchor client
Coffee roaster
CLIENT_02 · PILOT Q3
positioning drafted by Lex
$500 /mo target
Dental group
CLIENT_03 · PIPELINE Q4
first enterprise-shape client
$2k /mo target
P1
Consolidate the stack
0007a, 0007b shipped · events table next · Audra + Jay
33% · 7d
P2
MindBody data-model reset
canonical redesign · lead/member duality · Jules + Atlas
~ · May 5
B1
First paying client
coffee roaster pilot · needs your alignment with Lex
15% · Q3
The team

Who's working 4 executives · 5 execution · click anyone

CEO
J
Jay
CEO · CTO
EXECUTIVES · 4 DIRECT REPORTS
STANDBY
Ollie
COO · OPS
"Three rule refinements drafted. One worker blocked."
5 REPORTS3 PROPOSALS
NEEDS JAY
Lex
CSO · STRATEGY
"Client 02 memo is done. I need thirty minutes with you."
B1 BLOCKEDMEMO READY
STANDBY
$
Cash
CFO
"Burn tiny. At full roster: eighty-five a month. Comfortable."
$3.42 TODAY$85 PROJ
STANDBY
Harper
CHRO
"Audra's quarterly: strong hire. Review seventy percent drafted."
1 REVIEW WIPDRAFTING
EXECUTION · REPORTS TO OLLIE
Audra
REVIEWER
Reading PR #26. Session leak flagged.
8 REVIEWSLIVE
Jules
DEBUG
Ready to deploy. Needs API scope approval.
ETA: P2QUEUED
Atlas
PLANNER
Drafted 0007c–f. Scope blocked on Ollie.
1 BLOCKDRAFTING
Digby
DIGEST
Monday briefing in draft. Light week.
APR 28WATCHING
Argus
MONITOR
Asleep. Awaiting SLO targets.
DEPLOY: P2STANDBY
The desk

Needs you 3 decisions · 2 blocking milestones

Le
Thirty minutes with Lex on Client 02 positioning
Blocks B1 · every week slipped = 1 week delayed MRR
At
Scope the events table for 0007c
Blocks P1 progress · 15-min call or written brief
Ju
Approve Jules deployment + API scopes
Unblocks debug-friction reduction · not blocking today · P2 work
PHASE_1 · ON TRACK FOR MAY_05 · 2 OF 6 SHIPPED · 0 JAY-BLOCKERS
SQUAD · HR · Q1 2026
Team performance review
Same hierarchy. Different lens. Performance, trends, strengths, and watch areas.
Team health
8.4/ 10
AVG ACROSS 4 ACTIVE
Strong performers
2
↑ AUDRA & CASH
Watch list
1
⏱ LEX · CAPACITY
Review cycle
Q1
DUE APR 30
CEO
J
Jay
NOT REVIEWED
EXECUTIVES · HARPER'S ASSESSMENT
STRONG
Ollie
COO · OPS
8.7 / 10
↑ first cycle
STRENGTH Clear delegation. Five reports, zero escalation to Jay this week.
WATCH Tends to buffer too much. Let things escalate faster.
FULL REVIEWAPR 30
WATCH
Lex
CSO · STRATEGY
7.2 / 10
— first cycle
STRENGTH Sharp positioning work. Client 02 memo landed in one pass.
WATCH Often blocked on Jay. Needs clearer autonomy boundaries.
FULL REVIEWAPR 30
STRONG
$
Cash
CFO · FINANCE
8.9 / 10
↑ first cycle
STRENGTH Precise forecasting. $85/mo projection holds to ±5%.
WATCH Light on revenue-side analysis. Add client economics modeling.
FULL REVIEWAPR 30
NEW
Harper
CHRO · SELF
— / 10
PENDING JAY
NOTE Self-reviews can't be self-authored. Jay's 15 min needed.
SELF-REVIEWNEEDS JAY
EXECUTION · PERFORMANCE BY OLLIE + HARPER
Audra
REVIEWER
9.1 / 10
2 real bugs · 0 false pos · 100% calibration
STRONG · RENEW
Jules
DEBUG
— / 10
Not deployed · review in Q2 after 30 days live
NEW · PENDING
Atlas
PLANNER
— / 10
Drafted plans · needs run cycles to evaluate
NEW · PENDING
Digby
DIGEST
— / 10
Standby. First digest Apr 28.
STANDBY
Argus
MONITOR
— / 10
Not deployed yet. P2 rollout.
STANDBY
HR ANALYSIS DRAFTED BY HARPER · CONTRIBUTING DATA FROM OLLIE, CASH · CYCLE Q1 2026
DASHBOARD / SQUAD / AUDRA
Audra AI reviewer · v0.1.0
"I read every PR. I flag the real stuff, skip the noise, and let Jay know when something needs a human's judgment."
LIVE DEPLOYED APR 19 SONNET 4.6
Bugs caught
2
BOTH REAL PROD
False positives
0
ALL ACTIONABLE
Total cost
$0.84
$0.11 AVG
Avg time
58s
42s–82s
ACTIVITY LOG LAST 5 DAYS · INCLUDES HANDOFFS
Today · Thu Apr 23
11:41
concernPR #26 · session leak in main.py
→ escalated to Jay (self-ref 7.3)
Wed Apr 22
22:48
escPR #25 · FAIL rule 3.1 (print in CLI script) · Jay overrode with note
→ handed off to Ollie (rule refinement proposal)
10:47
escPR #24 · fix 0007a session cleanup + rule 5.4 · Jay merged
→ notified Cash (cost: $0.14)
Tue Apr 21
14:22
passPR #23 · 2-line infra · clean pass in 42s
Mon Apr 20
14:18
caughtPR #20 re-review · session leak in _member_repository · would exhaust pool
→ routed to Jay (blocker) and Ollie (new rule 5.4)
13:06
passPR #21 · fix normalize_database_url · clean pass
Sat Apr 19
16:33
caughtPR #20 · bypass of normalize_database_url · would break next Railway redeploy
→ routed to Jay (rule 2.2 blocker)
11:12
passPR #17 · smoke-test review · self-check green
1:1 with Audra
CONTEXT: HER LOG · LAST 5 DAYS
ONLINE
J
How's PR #26 looking? You flagged it at 11:41.
11:48 AM
Au
The session leak is subtle — it's in the request handler that opens a DB session but only closes it on the happy path. If any exception fires between the query and the response, the session never returns to the pool. Under load, pool exhaustion. Same pattern as PR #20 last Monday.
11:48 AM · 2.3s
J
Did you propose a fix or just flag?
11:49 AM
Au
Flagged with location and severity. I don't write the fix — Claude Code does. I wrote a concern note pointing to rule 5.4 (which you and I codified Monday) and named the dependency-injection pattern as the intended shape.
11:49 AM · 1.8s
J
What's your read on how often this pattern will keep showing up?
11:50 AM
Au
Worth watching. I've now seen the session-cleanup pattern twice in a week on PRs from Claude Code. Rule 5.4 was supposed to catch it pre-commit but only works when Claude Code runs my review locally — and that's a behavior you can't reliably enforce. I'd suggest Ollie draft a pre-commit hook to run the rule 5.4 check before push. I can send him a note if you want.
11:50 AM · 3.1s
J
Yes, hand it to Ollie. And what else should I know this week that I wouldn't think to ask?
11:51 AM
Au
Handing off to Ollie now. Two things you didn't ask: (1) Rule 7.3 fired three times this week on legitimate doc updates. It's noisy in a way that will train you to rubber-stamp overrides, which is the failure mode the rule was meant to prevent. (2) Most of my cost came from PR #24 re-review because Claude Code pushed six commits before you approved. Squashing before review would save ~30%.
11:51 AM · 4.2s
Audra is typing...
SQUAD · BOARD ROOM
Executive council
CURRENT SESSION · 8 MIN ELAPSED
Should we pursue Client 02 (coffee roaster, $500/mo) or push harder toward Client 03 (dental group, $2k/mo)?
CONVENED BY JAY · THU APR 23 · 11:42 CT
AGENDA SET
OPENING STATEMENTS
LIVE DISCUSSION
DECISION
AROUND THE TABLE
Ollie
COO
Opening delivered · listening
Lex
CSO
Making a counter-point to Cash
$
Cash
CFO
Challenged · awaiting response
Harper
CHRO
Opening delivered · listening
DISCUSSION THREAD 7 messages · live
J
Jay CEO 11:42
Team — I want to align on the next client. Client 02 (coffee roaster, $500/mo, pilot) or Client 03 (dental group, $2k/mo, enterprise shape). Give me your read, then argue it out.
Lex CSO 11:43
Client 02. The coffee roaster is the right first paying customer because failing with them is cheap and winning with them gives us a repeatable pattern for 10 more like them. The dental group is a trap — high revenue, but enterprise sales cycles will eat six months while we learn nothing we can generalize.
$
Cash CFO 11:45
Pushing back. Four Client 02s at $500/mo = $2k. One Client 03 at $2k/mo = $2k. Same revenue, but Client 03 is one onboarding, one churn risk, one relationship. Four coffee roasters is four of everything. CAC matters. Favor Client 03.
Harper CHRO 11:46
Team capacity check. Right now we have one live agent and one queued. An enterprise client at $2k/mo will expect more than we can deliver — dedicated support, SLAs, custom work. A roaster pilot fits our current bandwidth. Client 03 before we have at least four agents live is setting up for a churn event.
Ollie COO 11:48
From ops: we can onboard Client 02 without new infrastructure. Client 03 would require a multi-tenant data-model migration earlier than Phase 2 plans. That's 3-4 weeks of work, not currently scoped.
Lex CSO · LIVE 11:50
@Cash — your CAC argument assumes Client 03 is winnable with current positioning. I'm telling you: we don't have an enterprise-shape pitch. We'd spend three months building one before we even get a meeting. Three months of @Ollie's multi-tenant migration for a sales process that might not close. Meanwhile Client 02 is a 30-day pilot. The risk-adjusted math flips the other way.
$
Cash CFO · LIVE 11:52
Fair point. I'll grant that my CAC math assumed equal close probability. If @Lex's read on positioning is right, expected value strongly favors Client 02. But I want on record: if we land four coffee roasters by Q4, we need to revisit the dental pipeline seriously. Boutique pilots don't compound unless we use them to build the enterprise story.