AI coding changed the work. Teams still need a workflow
Claude Code is powerful for the person driving it. FlightDesk was built for the rest of the team: leads, developers, PMs, QA, and anyone who needs to see, test, and approve the work.
The gap is not just session visibility
FlightDesk started from a real pain: cloud AI coding sessions were hard to monitor, review feedback had to be copied back into the agent, and teams had no clean way to keep PR checks, preview state, and handoff notes together.
The AI platforms are moving quickly, and some of that session-level pain will become native. That is a good thing. The durable problem is broader: teams need an operational layer for AI-built work.
A lead should be able to see what everyone is building. A reviewer should have a live URL for every PR. A QA person should be able to test and approve the change without touching the original Claude session.
The team workflow bottleneck
AI can create work faster than a team can coordinate it. Without a shared task view, live preview environment, and clean QA handoff, the bottleneck moves from writing code to deciding what is ready to ship.
What FlightDesk adds around Claude Code
FlightDesk is not a replacement for Claude Code. It is the team layer around it:
Team-wide visibility
One operational screen for every AI-built task, stage, owner, blocker, branch, PR, preview, and next step.
Preview environments
Every PR gets a real running environment with configurable setup, processes, secrets, health checks, logs, and teardown.
QA handoff
Plain-language test plans, preview links, assignments, approval, and change requests live together on the task.
Integration support
GitHub and SonarQube feed useful signals into the workflow, while the core product stays focused on how the team ships the work.
The goal is simple: make AI-built work visible, testable, and approvable by the whole team.
Who is FlightDesk for?
FlightDesk is a Claude Code tool. If you're not using Claude Code, this isn't for you. If your team is using Claude Code and needs a shared workflow for the work it produces, this is exactly what you need.
It works best for teams that want one place to answer practical questions: what is in progress, what has a preview, who needs to test it, what feedback remains, and whether the change is ready to merge.
Experienced developers
Already using AI extensively and needing a clean path from task to PR to tested, approved work.
Teams scaling AI adoption
Multiple people using Claude Code and needing shared visibility, preview links, ownership, QA handoff, and persistent context.
Ready to reduce the overhead?
Focus on planning and approving. Let FlightDesk handle everything in between.