Same job both times: a modified version of our UI, fast, without a designer or engineer hand-building each one. I keep running into this at Canary, and I'm not convinced we've cracked it.
Rebranded versions of the product for whichever enterprise prospect sales is pitching — their branding, their data, the right feature flags.
Show a UI change — sometimes small, sometimes bigger — well enough that the team can react to it. Today: a screenshot into Figma Make, then iterate.
Make a static copy of the frontend, sample data baked in. A coding agent recolors it to spin up demo environments; the chatbot is the front door — point it at the customer's site, it rebrands.
We built this. It works. Three problems:
Take it seriously anyway. What would it actually need? A model that looks at the product the way a person does — screenshots, the rendered DOM and HTML, the source. We have all of that. The only real bar: can it do it well enough to stop needing constant steering?
Right now it can't — even Opus needs steering. But copying a whole codebase was never realistic before (months). Now it's two or three weeks. Still horrible work, and maybe the human isn't needed: if the code is throwaway — never ships, all black boxes — maybe nobody steers. Just a loop that keeps inspecting until an agent can pass it off.
No copy. Open the actual page — real branding, real data, real feature flags — and the page is the canvas. Describe a change; an agent reads the DOM, writes a bit of CSS or JS, injects it. Nothing to sync, because there's nothing to sync. You're already on the thing you'd ship.
Its own problems:
Both bottleneck on the same thing: a model that can look at a UI and change it well without someone steering every step. A is feasible-but-grim manual work that might not even need a human. B is cleaner in principle but blocked on complex apps.
So is there a way to do this yet? Or are we just early?