Function cockpit
Engineering
Agents build, test and document. Engineers own architecture and release.
Phase: Phase 3 — Functional orchestration
Run the intent-to-release graph as a governed system: decomposition, code generation, testing, documentation, vulnerability detection and deployment preparation are agent work; product intent, architecture and production release remain human.
Trust score
0
Touchless
0%
Human review
0%
Override rate
0%
Capacity released
25-40% engineering capacity in selected software-factory settings (case-specific)
Accountable human
Chief Technology Officer
CoS agent: Engineering Chief of Staff
Autonomy, trust, and throughput at a glance
Health
Is this function holding
Four readings with a printed rule behind each, then the outcome measures the function is judged on. A reading without a rule is decoration.
Autonomy against target
71%
9 points short of the 80% target
Trust score
85
at or above the 85 floor for a rung promotion
Touchless rate
64%
36% of items still take a person somewhere in the run
Override rate
9%
people are reversing the agents often enough that the ceiling is doing real work
Lead time to change
-58%2.4days
Approved intent to production-ready package
Escaped defects
-117/release
Defects found after release, rolling four releases
Model-generated code
+946%
Share of merged lines authored by agents under review
Change failure rate
-2.64.1%
Releases requiring rollback or hotfix
Open critical findings
-83items
Security findings blocking promotion
Operations
What the function is running
The roster and where it sits on the ladder, the split between what runs alone and what a person still signs, and a slice of the floor as it stands.
Where this roster sits on the autonomy ladder
A0 assisted through A4 autonomous. Moving an agent up a rung is a governance decision, not a config change.
Agents
11
Active now
10
Tasks / 24h
10,976
Mean success
92%
Work mix, as it stands
How the function's volume divides between the agents and the people.
Runs end to end without a person
64%
cleared inside the ceiling, no queue, no signature
A person reads it before it clears
27%
evidence posted, a named reviewer signs
A person reverses the agent
9%
the agent proposed, the human decided otherwise
Capacity released
25-40% engineering capacity in selected software-factory settings (case-specific)
What runs without a person
Committed to autonomy inside a defined ceiling.
- Code scaffolding and bounded change generation
- Test suite creation, execution and defect reproduction
- Design and operating documentation refresh
- Static analysis and low-risk dependency updates
- Sandbox deployment and approved remediation
What stays with people
Judgment, accountability, and anything a regulator would ask a human about.
- Architecture and platform standards
- Requirements acceptance and product intent
- Safety-critical code and threat decisions
- Breaking changes and public API contracts
- Production release and irreversible data migration
On the floor right now
A slice of live work. The full board carries every item.
- ENG-7412Awaiting human
Release pack — payments service v4.2
Release · Release manager · 54m old · 14 services
- ENG-7413Autonomous
Regression suite regeneration — billing module
Verify · Engineering CoS · 18m old · 1,840 cases
- ENG-7414Escalated
Legacy translation — interest calculation engine
Build · Principal architect · 6h 12m old · 31K LOC
- ENG-7415Drafted
Story decomposition — partner onboarding intent
Intent · Product owner · 1h 36m old · 18 stories
- ENG-7416Awaiting human
Incident remediation proposal — checkout latency
Verify · Service owner · 27m old · Sev-2
- ENG-7417Complete
Dependency uplift batch — internal libraries
Build · Engineering CoS · 3h 25m old · 23 packages
Actions
What this function is asking a person to do
Ordered by size. Each figure is a live count from this function's own work and governance records, not a target.
3
Items awaiting a person
queued against a named human, clock running
2
Governance decisions pending
an agent stopped at a gate and asked
0
Items older than 48 hours
on the floor long enough to be a problem
1
Agents below 80 confidence
running, but not at a level that supports a promotion
Brakes available right now
What a named human can pull today to stop this function, without waiting for an engineer.
- Unexplained dependency introduced into the build
- Secret or credential exposure detected in a diff
- Test bypass or coverage suppression
- Architecture-policy violation in a merged change
- Rising incident rate after an agent-prepared release
Live observability
What has actually been decided, and where each agent stops
A dashboard that shows only outcomes hides the decisions that produced them. This is the governance record as written, and the ceiling every agent is held to.
Governance record
Most recent first. Each entry names the actor and the call.
Payment service release pack awaiting authorization
PendingRelease Agent assembled the deployment plan, rollback rehearsal evidence and test attestation for the payments service. Two moderate findings remain open and are documented in the pack.
approval · Release manager · materiality high
Secret detected in candidate branch
ContainedSecurity Agent detected a live credential in a feature branch, blocked promotion, revoked the token through the identity service and opened an incident record.
escalation · Security Agent · materiality high
Dependency batch updated autonomously
Auto-executedDeveloper Agent applied 23 low-risk dependency updates with full regression passes and provenance recorded against each change.
notify · Developer Agent · materiality low
Legacy migration equivalence gap
PendingMigration Agent found behavioral divergence in an interest-calculation routine during translation. Work paused and the divergence packaged for the owning architect.
escalation · Principal architect · materiality medium
Escalation ceilings
Past the line the agent stops and hands the decision to the named human with the evidence attached.
- A4
Engineering Chief of Staff
Ceiling: Coordination only — no merge or release authority
Then: Any architectural conflict or release-evidence gap escalates to the CTO before the release window.
- A3
Requirements Agent
Ceiling: Drafting only; acceptance remains with the product owner
Then: Ambiguous or conflicting intent is returned to the product owner rather than resolved by inference.
- A3
Architecture Analyst
Ceiling: Advisory only; no architecture decision authority
Then: Any change crossing a published architecture boundary routes to the architecture review board.
- A2
Developer Agent
Ceiling: Max 400 changed lines per unit of work; no schema or public API change
Then: Security-sensitive paths, migrations and public interfaces require named senior approval before merge.
- A3
Test Agent
Ceiling: Non-production environments only
Then: Coverage regression beyond the published threshold blocks the pipeline and notifies the release manager.
Is policy and strategy coming to fruition
Does the intent above this function reach the work inside it
Counted per sub-function, where each step only counts if the step before it did. A policy that never reaches a running workflow has not landed, however well it reads.
Chain from stance to transaction
6 of 11 sub-functions carry a ratified position, an active policy and a live workflow
Ratified position
6
of 11 sub-functions — a stance the leadership signed, not a draft
...and an active policy
6
a rule in force, with a version and an approver
...reaching a live workflow
6
the rule reaches something that actually runs
...and landing in a GBS tower
4
the run is executed on the shared transaction spine
5 of the 11 sub-functions are executing at volume without the full chain behind them. They run to a general standard rather than to a rule with a version and an approver, and the gap first appears at the position step.
What this page is, and what it is not
Every reading here is computed live from this function's own records, which makes it exact and makes it narrow. Volumes, unit costs, autonomy and trust are modeled: none has been reconciled against an enterprise resource planning system, a service management tool or a payroll register. Read the outcome measures as the shape of the argument, not as an audited result.
Deloitte's Agent-Orchestrated Development Life Cycle shifts engineers toward orchestration, architecture and validation. BCG Platinion reports 3-5 times productivity in selected agentic software-factory settings, while Accenture reports 30% efficiency improvement in certain migration work and a 50% reduction in AI-application build time across more than 75 deployed use cases. These are case-specific and not general software-engineering averages.