I understand that everyone comes here with the hope of winning the Product of the Day award (at least one of the top three spots).

But so what does that mean for you?

Are you going to sell more products/subscriptions?

Genuinely curious what the community does here.

We've been talking to hundreds of teams building with Cursor, Claude Code, and other agentic tools and the honest answer from most of them is: "We just run it and hope."

Some do a quick manual click-through. Some write a few spot checks. Some just ship and wait for users to find the bugs.

We built TestSprite to solve exactly this autonomous testing that runs from your PRD and codebase but I'm curious what your actual workflow looks like before you merge.

AI workflow automation tools help you design, run, and evolve workflows that actually take action not just suggest what to do next. Some use AI to make workflows easier to build. Others embed AI directly into execution so workflows can handle ambiguity, make decisions, and adapt as they run. The strongest tools do both.

This definition excludes tools where AI only generates static workflows and then steps aside. It also excludes general assistants that never meaningfully participate in end-to-end execution.

With the advent of clawdbots, it's as if we've all lost our inhibitions and "put our lives completely in their hands."

I'm all for delegating work, but not giving them too much personal/sensitive stuff to handle.

Teams aren t just adding AI into existing workflows.
They re reshaping the workflows themselves with the AI agent in the loop.

Steps get removed.
Objectives become clearer.
Old constraints disappear.
Processes reorganize around what the system can now do natively.

The real productivity gain isn t automation.
It s rethinking the architecture entirely.

Curious to hear from this crowd:
What s one workflow you rebuilt because AI made the old version irrelevant?