The next task will almost certainly suit a different agent. Keep the context when you change tools → With Bring Your Own Agent, you can switch between Codex, Claude Code, Cursor, and other tools while keeping the same underlying context: • Switch model tools seamlessly • Reuse recorded briefs... and Playbooks • Maintain strict permission boundaries Models will keep changing. Today it’s Claude, tomorrow it’s Cursor. What stays is the context you built. Save the rules, keep the history, and bring whichever agent fits the job.show more

When reviewing an internal tool, I don't just read the agent's code description—I test it with real customer data. Using an Instant AirApp, we can instantly surface workspace data into a usable CRM interface: ▸ Open the account record ▸ Review activity logs ▸ Inspect deal stages Because the AirApp runs directly inside Busabase on live workspace data, I can evaluate the result in a real business workflow.

A quick "Done!" in a chat window tells me almost nothing. With Owner or Admin access, Team Insights in Busabase Cloud gives me visibility into actual workspace activity: → Track change logs and proposal trends → Audit contributions across human and agent sources It gives me a concrete baseline to review what changed, without mistaking a busy activity chart for proof that the work is correct.

Even the best playbook needs solid ground behind it. Instead of scattering context across local drives and private chats, I keep current briefs, agreed examples, and project records in Busabase’s shared workspace: • Centralize project assets & outputs • Set precise read/write permissions for teams and agents • Keep private files isolated unless explicitly shared Connecting a tool doesn't dump your local hard drive into the cloud. You control what becomes shared company context.

"Update the record" leaves way too much room for an agent to guess. In Shared Playbooks, I save prompts that spell out the exact job: ▸ Context: Use this specific Base ▸ Format: Keep these required fields ▸ Governance: Submit as a draft for human review A teammate can copy these instructions straight into a connected agent. The next attempt starts with defined standard procedures—not a half-remembered prompt.

Before another agent touches a project, I want the brief and working instructions ready in one place. Give the next agent the project background → Changing tools is easy. Remembering which decisions, examples, and rules to explain again? That’s where things break.

Two AI agents can finish the same task and leave me with a third job: making their answers agree. One follows an outdated brief. The other misses a key team rule. Before blaming either model, there’s one thing I check in @Busabase4agent: What context did they actually have to work with? 👇