Shift Note: Set Up the Shared Claude Code Workflow

Start the shift with one agreed working method

Claude Code is a coding assistant that works with a project through a terminal-based interface. It can help explain code, propose changes, edit files, and run development commands when permitted. For a team, the useful question is not simply whether it can write code. It is whether everyone can use it without creating a different, undocumented development process.

A shared workflow gives the assistant consistent project context while keeping people responsible for decisions. Start with one repository, a small set of tasks, and the same review rules you already use for human-written changes.

Put project instructions where teammates can review them

Add a CLAUDE.md file to the repository to record guidance Claude Code should follow. Treat it as a short working agreement, not a complete copy of your documentation. Because the file lives with the code, teammates can review changes to it through the normal pull request process.

• Explain the repository layout and identify the directories relevant to common tasks.
• Record the commands for installing dependencies, running tests, checking types, and formatting code.
• Describe local conventions, including naming patterns and how the team handles errors.
• Identify changes that require a human decision, such as database migrations or new dependencies.

Keep these instructions factual and maintainable. A command that no longer works can send every new session down the same wrong path. Also remember that written instructions are guidance, not an access-control boundary.

Give each task a small, checkable finish line

A request such as “clean up authentication” leaves too many decisions unstated. A better task names the problem, the allowed scope, and the evidence needed to finish. For example, ask for a fix to an expired-session error, limit the work to the relevant handler, and require a regression test.

For unfamiliar code, ask Claude Code to inspect the relevant files and propose a plan before editing. Check that plan yourself. Separate unrelated cleanup from the requested fix so reviewers can understand the patch without reconstructing the entire conversation.

Keep credentials and execution permissions separate

Each developer should use approved credentials rather than copying a shared secret into repository files or chat. Keep credentials out of CLAUDE.md, committed configuration, and task descriptions. Use your organization’s approved secret-storage method and establish who can revoke access.

Review the tool’s permission settings before allowing command execution. Start conservatively, especially around destructive commands, production systems, and sensitive data. Do not assume that a project instruction telling the assistant to avoid something technically prevents it from doing so.

Make the pull request carry the evidence

The handoff should be a reviewable change, not a transcript. Ask the developer using Claude Code to read the diff, run the relevant checks, and explain the result in the pull request.

• State what changed and connect it to the original task.
• List the checks actually run and report their results accurately.
• Call out checks that were skipped, unresolved questions, and remaining risks.
• Remove unrelated edits and inspect the patch for secrets or accidental configuration changes.

An assistant’s statement that a task is complete is not verification. Your tests, reviewers, and release process still determine whether the change is ready.

Use a relay when access needs span several tools

If the team uses several coding assistants, Relay365 is worth considering as a pay-as-you-go relay desk for multiple model families. It works with Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, and OpenAI SDK clients. That makes it relevant when access needs extend beyond one tool.

Before standardizing on it, verify the current setup instructions, available models, data-handling terms, and usage controls against your team’s requirements. Keep tool-specific configuration documented separately; compatibility does not mean every client uses identical settings. Create a Relay365 account to evaluate it with a small, non-sensitive task before expanding access.

Leave the next shift a usable handoff

After the first few tasks, review where instructions were missing, permissions were too broad, or checks were unclear. Update the shared guidance with what you learned. The goal is a repeatable loop: scoped request, reviewed plan, controlled execution, verified patch, and a handoff another engineer can understand.