Skip to content

Content: Clarify outcome for AI coding copilots case #769

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
alehar9320 wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Content: Clarify outcome for AI coding copilots case #769

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions .Jules/content.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
2026-05-10 - [Work Content Track] | Signal: [Stale/Clarity] | Lean Update: [Clarified outcome phrasing in src/content/work/ai-coding-copilots.md under 10% line delta]
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion src/content/work/ai-coding-copilots.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -25,6 +25,6 @@ As Product Manager, Developer Experience at IFS in Greater Stockholm, I work on

## Outcome

Internal AI coding copilots for IFS engineering teams.
Internal AI coding copilots for IFS engineering teams, enhancing developer productivity.

@alehar9320 alehar9320 Aug 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This clause is the miss.

enhancing developer productivity is brochure-speak, not an outcome. The design-system case names what changed with published proof (up to 2x / 30x / Zeroheight). Analytics names what the work is for in plain words (so IFS Cloud roadmap decisions rest on how people actually use the product). This line does neither. It tacks a slogan onto a sentence the page already uses for the dek, TL;DR, and Problem.

Thin proof is a locked brand risk. The work is current (in this role since February 2025), so we don't have a finished result to claim. Don't invent one.

Drop the clause:

Internal AI coding copilots for IFS engineering teams.

If we later rewrite this case, write a real Outcome from published proof, matching that analytics / design-system voice. This 1-line Jules edit is the wrong vehicle for that. Don't ship a slogan meanwhile.

@google-labs-jules google-labs-jules Bot Aug 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed completely. Dropped the slogan clause and reverted the Outcome section of src/content/work/ai-coding-copilots.md to avoid unverified claims or brochure-speak.


<a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/alehar/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Get in touch on LinkedIn</a>
Loading