How a two-person team keeps a build organized without a PM
Two-person teams move quickly because communication is direct, but decisions still disappear between calls and chat threads. Without a shared record, both people can leave the same conversation with different assumptions. Add separate coding sessions and the gap grows: one teammate knows why the scope changed, while the other person's agent is still working from yesterday's plan.
A simple way to run it in Hark
- 01Share one venture
Keep the product brief, build notes, files, links, and brand assets in the same Hark project. Start with the work you already have, then check the proposed Current state together rather than treating an imported summary as settled fact. Workflow source
- 02Name one next action
Use Current state to make ownership, blockers, and the immediate next step visible to both teammates. Write a concrete handoff: who is checking checkout, what is blocked, and what result lets the other person continue. Workflow source
- 03Record decisions, not every task
Use the journal for choices, milestones, and handoffs while your existing tools continue to handle detailed execution. Capture the reason behind a choice, especially when it rules out an approach another agent might suggest. Workflow source
- 04Review together
Use the short weekly review to resolve questions and catch work that has gone cold. Confirm next actions, review agent proposals, and park work that no longer matters instead of carrying it forward by habit. Workflow source
- 05Keep both agents honest
Hark sessions are bound to the project you opened; accessing another requires an explicit switch. Quiet sessions leave a drafted handoff based on recorded activity. With repo export enabled, accepted state reaches .hark/HANDOFF.md and .hark/DECISIONS.md in your shared repository. Review drafts for gaps before relying on them. Workflow source
A shared project record, not another task tracker
Hark organizes the project record around Inventory, Health, Work, Authority, and Decisions. Repository and staging links sit alongside what is working, what remains uncertain, and which constraints must survive the next edit. Agreed means accepted, Observed requires system evidence, and Proposed remains a proposal. Accepting an agent's report does not prove a feature works. Keep evidence attached and uncertainty visible, as described in Hark's project record and evidence model.
The shared project also holds build documents, branding, files, and links. Importing an existing conversation proposes a Current state for review rather than making every sentence authoritative. The weekly review gives both teammates a place to confirm next actions, resolve questions, accept proposals, and park stale ideas. These project and review features keep coordination close to the work without requiring a second implementation backlog.
Resume your coding session without confusing it with team memory
Claude Code already saves local sessions continuously. claude --continue reopens the most recent session in the current directory; claude --resume opens a picker. /compact replaces conversation history with a summary, while /clear starts fresh and leaves the previous session available to resume. Those are useful personal continuity tools, not a shared account of what your teammate agreed to do. See Claude Code session management.
Keep stable conventions in the repository's CLAUDE.md and changing priorities in Hark. Claude Code's auto memory is machine-local, so it does not automatically become your teammate's memory. Once linked and selected as authoritative, repository instructions are mirrored by Hark rather than replaced. The early-access Claude Code mod adds the brief at session start and restores key project state after compaction. Follow the Claude Code connect guide, then verify the linked project with /hark brief. Other clients need their own connection and explicit session flow.
Share the outcome, not every private conversation
A teammate usually needs the changed behavior, remaining risk, and next action before a full transcript. Hark's session and handoff workflow makes that smaller record explicit. An automatic draft draws on recorded activity; it cannot recover work that was never recorded or observed. Check missing tests, unfinished changes, and unresolved questions before treating the draft as complete.
Claude Code web session sharing is separate from local transcript files. Web visibility and repository-access settings control who can open a shared session; local CLI transcripts are saved on the originating machine. Review sensitive content before sharing a web link or exporting a local conversation. The web sharing documentation explains account-specific controls. A Hark project link does not grant access to those separate conversations.
Hark’s public project page
Starter builds are coming. Until then, use Hark’s own documented build as the example structure for this setup.
View the public project page placeholder →Common questions
- Can I use this setup for an existing two-person team?
Yes. Import a conversation or brain dump, review the drafted project, and connect the repository when you are ready. You do not have to start from scratch. Product source Plan source
- Do all collaborators and agents see the same information?
They can work from the same Hark project and Current state, subject to project permissions and agent access scopes. Personal transcripts and local memory are not automatically shared. Product source Plan source
- Can I try this without adding a card?
Yes. Hark starts with a 14-day card-free trial, and your work remains readable if the trial ends before you choose a plan. Product source Plan source
- Does each teammate need a seat?
For both people to edit shared projects, use team seats. Studio includes three seats. Guests can read enabled sections and comment, but do not have normal editing access. Product source Plan source