Episode Details

AI coding agents now write almost all of Legora's code, with engineers running up to ten in parallel. Yet the CTO behind that shift thinks measuring adoption by tokens burned is a mistake. Jacob Lauritzen, CTO of Legora, joins Simon Maple to unpack what actually scales when agents do the typing, and where human judgment still has to stay in charge.

What we cover:
– How Legora's engineers orchestrate many AI coding agents at once, from shared local dev resources to cloud agent setups
– An agentic loop that reproduces, fixes and tests bugs straight from Slack
– Why token maxing is a bad way to drive AI adoption, and what to measure instead
– Agent evaluation: regression testing the harness as models and prompts change every week
– Decision models, the verifier's rule, and where autonomy ends and human judgment begins
– Why AI agents need more than a chat interface

Chapters:
00:00:00 - Introduction
00:01:47 - Legora's growth from $100M to $200M ARR
00:03:44 - Parallel coding agents and bug-fix loops
00:07:15 - Senior engineers vs AI-first engineers
00:10:10 - Why token maxing is the new lines of code
00:14:13 - What AI can and can't verify in legal work
00:17:30 - Decision models vs autoregressive LLMs
00:24:22 - Weekly model benchmarks and harness evals
00:26:58 - Why AI agents need more than a chat interface
00:35:03 - The verifier's rule and litigation strategy

Build your software factory, one workflow at a time, with Tessl:
https://tessl.co/lpg

🔔 Subscribe for weekly episodes on AI-native development

Is token count telling you anything real about how your team uses AI coding agents? Tell us in the comments.