You describe a startup idea. Twenty minutes later, you have a validated OpenSpec directory tree, complete with SHALL requirements, Gherkin acceptance criteria, and architecture decisions. No hand-writing specs. No prompt engineering. Point Claude Code (or Cursor, or Copilot) at it and start building.
That's the workflow Haytham delivers. This post is about why it matters and what the output actually looks like.
There are good reasons to split a complex task across multiple agents. A single agent trying to research a market, design an architecture, and write specs all at once will hit context limits, lose focus, and give you no chance to review between phases.
Decomposition buys you three things: specialization (each agent does one thing well), decision gates (you review before the next phase runs), and cost control (change one phase without re-running everything).
So you split the work. Research agent, planning agent, design agent, implementation agent. Each one focused and manageable.
But give the pipeline a specific, nuanced input. Something like "build an invite-only marketplace for vintage furniture restorers, with escrow payments, max 500 sellers at launch." What comes out the other end is a generic two-sided marketplace with open signup, Stripe checkout, and infinite scalability. Every distinctive constraint, the things that made the input yours, got smoothed away by agents who each did their job perfectly in isolation.
This is the telephone game, except the players are LLMs and the message is your system.