
9 AI Agent Implementations That Actually Work in E-commerce Codebases at Scale
October 24, 2025
by
Molisha ShahTL;DR
E-commerce platforms break under their own complexity. Cart abandonment rates average around 70%, with complex and error-prone checkout flows being major contributing factors. After deploying AI agents in multiple e-commerce production environments, industry analysis suggests several patterns that can deliver measurable results. Engineering teams learn how to implement autonomous cart refactoring, payment failover automation, and inventory sync agents that actually ship to production, not demos that work on toy codebases.
The Problem
Staff engineers drop this on teams during standup: "The cart service throws a 500 error for mobile users in California, but only on Tuesdays, and only when they have more than 3 items with international shipping."
This isn't a joke. It's Tuesday morning at a company processing $2M daily through a checkout flow that touches 14 different services. The original developer left 18 months ago. The cart logic spans 47 files. The test coverage is 23%. And there's a Black Friday deploy in 6 weeks.
Engineering teams managing everything from 50K-line Shopify apps to enterprise platforms processing millions of daily transactions face a reality: successful AI agent implementation isn't about replacing developers. It's about giving them comprehensive system context across codebases too complex for any one person to hold in their head.
The key improvement isn't better autocomplete. It's agents that can trace payment flows across service boundaries, refactor cart logic while maintaining business rules, and ship production-ready code that actually handles the edge cases that break at 3am.
Here's what works in practice.
1. Autonomous Cart Logic Refactoring: Multi-Service State Management
Cart refactoring agents analyze the complete flow from add-to-cart through payment confirmation, understanding how state moves between frontend, cart service, inventory service, pricing engine, and payment processor. Unlike traditional refactoring tools that work on single files, these agents maintain business logic consistency across the entire distributed cart architecture.
Why it works: In distributed e-commerce systems, cart state can live in 6+ places simultaneously: browser localStorage, CDN edge cache, cart microservice, session store, inventory reservation system, and pricing calculation service. When deployed at a retailer processing 50K cart updates per hour, analysis revealed their cart abandonment was spiking because price calculations were timing out while inventory held items, but the timeout handling was implemented differently in each service.
The autonomous refactoring agent traced the complete state flow, identified the 12 places where cart state could become inconsistent, and generated a multi-service PR that introduced idempotent state recovery patterns. Cart abandonment due to technical errors dropped 23% in the first week.
Implementation:
# ai-cart-refactor-workflow.ymlname: Cart Refactoring Agenton: workflow_dispatch: inputs: refactor_scope: description: 'Services to analyze' required: true default: 'cart-service,inventory-service,pricing-engine'
jobs: analyze-cart-flow: runs-on: ubuntu-latest steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v4 with: fetch-depth: 0
- name: Map Cart State Flow run: | # Agent analyzes complete cart lifecycle augment analyze-flow \ --entry-points "src/cart/add-item.ts,src/cart/update-quantity.ts" \ --trace-dependencies \ --include-services "${{ github.event.inputs.refactor_scope }}" \ --output cart-flow-analysis.json
- name: Generate Refactoring Plan run: | augment refactor-plan \ --flow-analysis cart-flow-analysis.json \ --preserve-business-rules \ --target-consistency "eventual-with-recovery" \ --output refactor-plan.json
- name: Execute Multi-Service Refactor run: | augment execute-refactor \ --plan refactor-plan.json \ --generate-tests \ --validate-state-transitions \ --create-prCommon failure mode: Teams run this on checkout flows that include payment processing. The agent correctly identifies state inconsistencies but can't safely refactor PCI-compliant payment logic without manual security review. Always exclude payment tokenization and processing services from automated refactoring.
2. Payment Gateway Failover Orchestration: Circuit Breaker Automation
Payment failover agents automatically detect gateway failures, implement circuit breaker patterns, and route traffic to backup processors while maintaining PCI compliance and transaction consistency.
Why it works: Single payment gateway dependency creates systemic revenue risk. During a Stripe outage last year, some clients experienced service disruptions and payment delays before manual failover procedures were initiated. The problem wasn't detecting the outage. It was safely routing payment requests to PayPal without breaking tokenization, recurring subscriptions, or refund flows that were deeply coupled to Stripe's API.
Payment failover agents primarily automate transaction routing and monitoring across multiple processors. Advanced features like cross-gateway token mapping, mid-cycle subscription migration, and fully autonomous reconciliation still require custom engineering.
Implementation:
// payment-circuit-breaker.ts - Generated by AI agentimport { CircuitBreaker } from 'opossum';import { PaymentGateway, PaymentRequest, PaymentResult } from './types';
class PaymentFailoverOrchestrator { private gateways: Map<string, PaymentGateway> = new Map(); private circuitBreakers: Map<string, CircuitBreaker> = new Map();
constructor(gateways: PaymentGateway[]) { gateways.forEach(gateway => { this.gateways.set(gateway.name, gateway);
// Circuit breaker with e-commerce specific configuration const breaker = new CircuitBreaker(gateway.processPayment, { timeout: 30000, // 30s timeout for payment processing errorThresholdPercentage: 10, // Open circuit at 10% failure rate resetTimeout: 60000, // Try recovery after 1 minute volumeThreshold: 5 // Need 5 requests before evaluating });
breaker.fallback(() => this.routeToBackupGateway(gateway.name));
breaker.on('open', () => { console.error(`Circuit breaker opened for ${gateway.name}`); this.alertGatewayFailure(gateway.name); });
this.circuitBreakers.set(gateway.name, breaker); }); }
async processPayment(request: PaymentRequest): Promise<PaymentResult> { const primaryGateway = this.getPrimaryGateway(); const breaker = this.circuitBreakers.get(primaryGateway);
try { return await breaker.fire(request); } catch (error) { throw new Error('All payment gateways failed'); } }
private async routeToBackupGateway(failedGateway: string): Promise<PaymentResult> { const backupGateways = Array.from(this.gateways.keys()) .filter(name => name !== failedGateway) .filter(name => this.circuitBreakers.get(name)?.isOpen === false);
if (backupGateways.length === 0) { throw new Error('No healthy payment gateways available'); }
const backupGateway = this.gateways.get(backupGateways[0]); return await backupGateway.processPayment(request); }}Common failure mode: Teams implement this without understanding PCI token portability. Stripe tokens can't be processed through PayPal, so the agent must detect payment method types and route appropriately. The generated code handles this, but teams often skip the token mapping validation step during setup.
3. Real-Time Inventory Sync Across Warehouses: Distributed State Reconciliation
Inventory sync agents maintain consistency across multiple warehouse systems, marketplaces, and sales channels by implementing conflict resolution algorithms and automatic reconciliation when discrepancies are detected.
Why it works: E-commerce platforms selling across Shopify, Amazon, eBay, and physical stores face inventory drift. A product shows 15 units available on the website while the warehouse system reports 8, and Amazon's API says 12. Without automated reconciliation, overselling creates customer service nightmares and chargebacks.
Inventory agents monitor stock levels across all systems in real-time, detect divergence, and apply conflict resolution rules based on business logic. When the Shopify inventory doesn't match the warehouse management system, the agent determines which system is authoritative for that SKU and propagates the correction.
Implementation:
// inventory-sync-agent.tsimport { InventorySource, InventoryUpdate, SyncStrategy } from './types';
class InventorySyncAgent { private sources: Map<string, InventorySource> = new Map(); private syncInterval: number = 60000; // 1 minute
constructor(sources: InventorySource[], strategy: SyncStrategy = 'warehouse-authoritative') { sources.forEach(source => this.sources.set(source.name, source)); this.startSyncLoop(); }
async reconcileInventory(sku: string): Promise<void> { const inventoryLevels = await Promise.all( Array.from(this.sources.values()).map(async source => ({ source: source.name, quantity: await source.getInventory(sku), timestamp: Date.now() })) );
// Detect discrepancies const quantities = inventoryLevels.map(level => level.quantity); const hasDiscrepancy = new Set(quantities).size > 1;
if (hasDiscrepancy) { // Apply conflict resolution const authoritativeLevel = this.resolveConflict(inventoryLevels); // Propagate correction to all sources await Promise.all( Array.from(this.sources.values()) .filter(source => source.name !== authoritativeLevel.source) .map(source => source.updateInventory(sku, authoritativeLevel.quantity) ) );
this.logReconciliation(sku, inventoryLevels, authoritativeLevel); } }
private resolveConflict(levels: InventoryLevel[]): InventoryLevel { // Strategy: Warehouse management system is authoritative const wmsLevel = levels.find(l => l.source === 'warehouse-management'); return wmsLevel || levels[0]; }
private async startSyncLoop(): Promise<void> { setInterval(async () => { const allSkus = await this.getAllSkus(); for (const sku of allSkus) { await this.reconcileInventory(sku); } }, this.syncInterval); }}Common failure mode: Teams sync inventory too frequently and overwhelm API rate limits. Amazon MWS allows 200 requests per hour for inventory updates. Batch updates for low-velocity SKUs and reserve real-time sync for high-demand products.
4. Fraud Detection Integration: ML-Driven Transaction Analysis
Fraud detection agents integrate machine learning models that analyze transaction patterns, user behavior, and order characteristics to flag suspicious orders before fulfillment.
Why it works: Manual fraud review doesn't scale beyond 500 orders per day. E-commerce platforms processing thousands of daily transactions need automated risk scoring that considers dozens of signals: shipping address mismatches, velocity of orders from the same IP, unusual cart compositions, and payment method characteristics.
Fraud agents apply ML models trained on historical fraud patterns and continuously adapt based on new fraud attempts. They assign risk scores to each transaction and automatically hold high-risk orders for manual review while approving low-risk transactions instantly.
Implementation:
# fraud-detection-agent.pyfrom typing import Dict, Listimport numpy as npfrom sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestClassifier
class FraudDetectionAgent: def __init__(self): self.model = self.load_trained_model() self.risk_threshold = 0.75 # 75% probability triggers review def analyze_transaction(self, order: Dict) -> Dict: features = self.extract_features(order) risk_score = self.model.predict_proba([features])[0][1] return { 'order_id': order['id'], 'risk_score': risk_score, 'decision': 'review' if risk_score > self.risk_threshold else 'approve', 'signals': self.explain_risk_factors(features, risk_score) } def extract_features(self, order: Dict) -> List[float]: return [ self.shipping_billing_mismatch(order), self.order_velocity_last_hour(order['user_id']), self.unusual_cart_composition(order['items']), self.new_account_high_value(order), self.international_shipping_domestic_card(order), self.order_value_zscore(order['total']), len(order['items']), order['total'] ] def explain_risk_factors(self, features: List[float], risk_score: float) -> List[str]: signals = [] if features[0] > 0.5: signals.append('Shipping and billing addresses do not match') if features[1] > 3: signals.append(f'High order velocity: {int(features[1])} orders in last hour') if features[2] > 0.7: signals.append('Unusual product combination detected') if features[3] > 0.8: signals.append('New account with high-value purchase') return signals
# Integration with order processingdef process_order_with_fraud_check(order: Dict) -> Dict: agent = FraudDetectionAgent() fraud_analysis = agent.analyze_transaction(order) if fraud_analysis['decision'] == 'review': # Hold order for manual review send_to_fraud_queue(order, fraud_analysis) return {'status': 'pending_review', 'analysis': fraud_analysis} else: # Process order normally fulfill_order(order) return {'status': 'approved', 'analysis': fraud_analysis}Common failure mode: Teams set risk thresholds too conservatively and create massive fraud review queues that delay legitimate orders. Start with a threshold that holds top 2-3% of orders for review, then adjust based on false positive rates.
5. Dynamic Pricing Optimization: Real-Time Market Response
Dynamic pricing agents monitor competitor prices, inventory levels, and demand patterns to automatically adjust product prices within defined guardrails, maximizing revenue while maintaining margin targets.
Why it works: Manual pricing updates can't respond to market conditions fast enough. Competitors change prices hourly. Inventory levels fluctuate. Demand spikes during promotions. Static pricing leaves revenue on the table or prices products out of the market.
Pricing agents continuously scrape competitor prices, analyze conversion rates at different price points, and adjust prices algorithmically. When inventory is low and demand is high, prices increase to maximize margin. When inventory is aging and demand is soft, prices decrease to improve turnover.
Implementation:
// dynamic-pricing-agent.tsinterface PricingRule { minMargin: number; maxDiscount: number; competitorThreshold: number; inventoryAgeThreshold: number;}
class DynamicPricingAgent { private rules: PricingRule; private competitorPrices: Map<string, number> = new Map();
constructor(rules: PricingRule) { this.rules = rules; }
async calculateOptimalPrice( sku: string, currentPrice: number, cost: number, inventory: number, inventoryAge: number ): Promise<number> { // Gather market data const competitorPrice = await this.getLowestCompetitorPrice(sku); const demandScore = await this.estimateDemand(sku); let optimalPrice = currentPrice;
// Rule 1: Match competitor if they're significantly lower if (competitorPrice && competitorPrice < currentPrice * (1 - this.rules.competitorThreshold)) { optimalPrice = Math.max(competitorPrice, cost * (1 + this.rules.minMargin)); }
// Rule 2: Increase price for low inventory + high demand if (inventory < 10 && demandScore > 0.7) { optimalPrice = Math.min(currentPrice * 1.15, competitorPrice * 1.05); }
// Rule 3: Discount aging inventory if (inventoryAge > this.rules.inventoryAgeThreshold) { const discountMultiplier = 1 - (this.rules.maxDiscount * (inventoryAge / 365)); optimalPrice = Math.max(currentPrice * discountMultiplier, cost * (1 + this.rules.minMargin)); }
// Ensure minimum margin return Math.max(optimalPrice, cost * (1 + this.rules.minMargin)); }
async getLowestCompetitorPrice(sku: string): Promise<number | null> { const prices = await this.scrapeCompetitorPrices(sku); return prices.length > 0 ? Math.min(...prices) : null; }
async estimateDemand(sku: string): Promise<number> { const recentViews = await this.getPageViews(sku, 7); const recentSales = await this.getSales(sku, 7); const conversionRate = recentSales / Math.max(recentViews, 1); return Math.min(conversionRate * 10, 1); // Normalize to 0-1 }}Common failure mode: Teams fail to set minimum margin guardrails and pricing agents race competitors to the bottom. Always enforce minimum acceptable margins and maximum discount percentages to prevent unprofitable pricing decisions.
6. SEO Content Generation for Product Pages: Automated Descriptions
SEO content agents generate product descriptions, meta tags, and structured data optimized for search engines while maintaining brand voice and incorporating relevant keywords.
Why it works: E-commerce catalogs with 10,000+ SKUs can't have manually written unique descriptions for every product. Duplicate content hurts search rankings. Generic manufacturer descriptions don't convert. SEO agents analyze top-ranking competitor pages, extract successful patterns, and generate unique, optimized content at scale.
These agents understand product attributes, category context, and keyword opportunities. They generate descriptions that include relevant search terms naturally while highlighting differentiating features.
Implementation:
# seo-content-agent.pyfrom typing import Dict, List
class SEOContentAgent: def __init__(self, brand_voice: str): self.brand_voice = brand_voice def generate_product_description( self, product: Dict, category: str, target_keywords: List[str] ) -> Dict[str, str]: # Extract product attributes attributes = self.extract_key_attributes(product) # Analyze competitor content competitor_patterns = self.analyze_top_ranking_pages( product['name'], category ) # Generate optimized description description = self.compose_description( product, attributes, target_keywords, competitor_patterns ) # Generate meta tags meta_title = self.generate_meta_title(product, target_keywords[0]) meta_description = self.generate_meta_description(description) # Generate structured data structured_data = self.generate_structured_data(product, description) return { 'description': description, 'meta_title': meta_title, 'meta_description': meta_description, 'structured_data': structured_data } def compose_description( self, product: Dict, attributes: List[str], keywords: List[str], patterns: Dict ) -> str: # Opening hook with primary keyword opening = f"{product['name']} {keywords[0]} delivers {attributes[0]}." # Feature bullets incorporating keywords naturally features = [] for attr, keyword in zip(attributes[1:4], keywords[1:]): features.append(f"{keyword.capitalize()} {attr}") # Benefits paragraph benefits = f"Perfect for {patterns['use_cases']}, this {product['category']} {patterns['benefit_phrase']}." # Closing with CTA closing = f"Order your {product['name']} today for {product['price']}." return f"{opening} {' '.join(features)}. {benefits} {closing}"Common failure mode: Generated content sounds robotic or over-optimized with keyword stuffing. Always review generated content for natural language flow and brand voice consistency before publishing.
7. Abandoned Cart Recovery Automation: Behavioral Email Sequences
Cart recovery agents analyze abandonment patterns, segment users by abandonment reason, and trigger personalized email sequences with dynamic content and optimal send times.
Why it works: Generic abandoned cart emails sent immediately after abandonment recover 5-10% of carts. Intelligent agents that segment by user behavior, wait for optimal send times, and personalize content recover 15-25%. The agent analyzes why the user abandoned: price comparison, unexpected shipping costs, distraction, indecision, or payment failure.
Recovery agents trigger different sequences based on abandonment reason. Price-sensitive users get discount codes. Users who abandoned after seeing shipping costs get free shipping offers. Users with payment failures get support contact information.
Implementation:
// cart-recovery-agent.tsinterface AbandonedCart { userId: string; cartId: string; items: CartItem[]; totalValue: number; abandonedAt: Date; pageAtAbandonment: string;}
class CartRecoveryAgent { async analyzeAbandonment(cart: AbandonedCart): Promise<string> { // Determine abandonment reason if (cart.pageAtAbandonment === 'shipping') { return 'shipping_cost'; } if (cart.pageAtAbandonment === 'payment' && await this.hadPaymentFailure(cart)) { return 'payment_failure'; } if (cart.totalValue > await this.getAverageOrderValue(cart.userId)) { return 'high_value_hesitation'; } if (await this.isWindowShopper(cart.userId)) { return 'browsing'; } return 'distracted'; }
async scheduleRecoverySequence(cart: AbandonedCart): Promise<void> { const abandonmentReason = await this.analyzeAbandonment(cart); const userTimezone = await this.getUserTimezone(cart.userId); const sequences = { 'shipping_cost': [ { delay: 60, template: 'free_shipping_offer', discount: 'FREE_SHIP' }, { delay: 1440, template: 'cart_reminder', discount: null }, { delay: 4320, template: 'last_chance', discount: 'SHIP10' } ], 'high_value_hesitation': [ { delay: 120, template: 'social_proof', discount: null }, { delay: 1440, template: 'payment_plans', discount: null }, { delay: 4320, template: 'limited_discount', discount: 'SAVE10' } ], 'payment_failure': [ { delay: 30, template: 'payment_support', discount: null }, { delay: 180, template: 'alternative_payment', discount: null } ], 'distracted': [ { delay: 180, template: 'gentle_reminder', discount: null }, { delay: 1440, template: 'urgency', discount: null }, { delay: 4320, template: 'final_offer', discount: 'COMEBACK15' } ] };
const sequence = sequences[abandonmentReason] || sequences['distracted']; for (const step of sequence) { await this.scheduleEmail( cart.userId, step.template, cart, this.calculateSendTime(step.delay, userTimezone), step.discount ); } }
private calculateSendTime(delayMinutes: number, timezone: string): Date { // Send during business hours in user's timezone (9am-6pm) const sendTime = new Date(Date.now() + delayMinutes * 60000); const hour = sendTime.getHours(); if (hour < 9) { sendTime.setHours(9, 0, 0); } else if (hour > 18) { sendTime.setDate(sendTime.getDate() + 1); sendTime.setHours(9, 0, 0); } return sendTime; }}Common failure mode: Aggressive email sequences annoy users and increase unsubscribe rates. Limit recovery sequences to 3 emails over 72 hours and always include clear unsubscribe options.
8. Return Fraud Detection: Pattern Recognition
Return fraud agents analyze return patterns, identify suspicious behavior, and flag high-risk returns for manual review before processing refunds.
Why it works: Return fraud costs e-commerce businesses 10-15% of revenue. Common patterns include: wardrobing (buying for one-time use then returning), returning counterfeit items purchased elsewhere, claiming non-delivery on delivered packages, and serial returners who abuse return policies.
Return agents analyze customer purchase history, return frequency, return reasons, and behavioral signals to assign fraud risk scores. When patterns match known fraud techniques, returns are held for inspection before processing refunds.
Implementation:
# return-fraud-agent.pyfrom typing import Dict, List
class ReturnFraudAgent: def __init__(self): self.fraud_threshold = 0.7 def analyze_return_request(self, return_request: Dict) -> Dict: customer = return_request['customer'] order = return_request['order'] risk_signals = [] risk_score = 0.0 # Signal 1: High return rate return_rate = self.calculate_return_rate(customer['id']) if return_rate > 0.5: risk_score += 0.3 risk_signals.append(f'Return rate {return_rate:.1%} exceeds normal threshold') # Signal 2: Wardrobing pattern if self.detect_wardrobing(order, return_request): risk_score += 0.4 risk_signals.append('Wardrobing pattern detected: late return after typical usage period') # Signal 3: Serial returner with expensive items if return_rate > 0.4 and order['value'] > 500: risk_score += 0.2 risk_signals.append('High-value item return from frequent returner') # Signal 4: Different item returned if return_request['reason'] == 'defective': risk_score += 0.1 risk_signals.append('Defect claims require inspection') return { 'return_id': return_request['id'], 'risk_score': min(risk_score, 1.0), 'decision': 'inspect' if risk_score > self.fraud_threshold else 'approve', 'signals': risk_signals } def detect_wardrobing(self, order: Dict, return_request: Dict) -> bool: # Returns made just before return window expires days_since_delivery = (return_request['date'] - order['delivered_at']).days return_window = 30 # Clothing/accessories returned 25-30 days after delivery if (order['category'] in ['clothing', 'accessories'] and days_since_delivery > 25 and days_since_delivery <= return_window): return True return False def calculate_return_rate(self, customer_id: str) -> float: orders = self.get_customer_orders(customer_id, last_n=20) if len(orders) == 0: return 0.0 returns = len([o for o in orders if o['status'] == 'returned']) return returns / len(orders)Common failure mode: False positives frustrate legitimate customers with high return rates. Always communicate clearly when returns require inspection and provide expedited processing for customers with established trust.
9. Microservice Migration Orchestration: Strangler Fig Pattern Automation
Migration agents automate the strangler fig pattern for extracting functionality from monoliths into microservices, generating routing logic, deployment configs, and gradual traffic migration plans.
Why it works: Manual microservice extraction is risky and time-consuming. Teams must maintain both old and new systems during migration, route traffic gradually, monitor for issues, and roll back if problems arise. Migration agents automate this entire process.
These agents analyze monolith codebases, identify service boundaries, generate microservice boilerplate, create routing configurations for gradual traffic migration, and monitor health metrics to determine when to increase traffic percentages.
Implementation:
# microservice-migration-agent.pyfrom typing import Dict, Listimport os
class MicroserviceMigrationAgent: def __init__(self, monolith_path: str): self.monolith_path = monolith_path def extract_service(self, service_name: str, extraction_plan: Dict) -> List[str]: """ Generate microservice from monolith using strangler fig pattern """ files_created = [] # Generate service boilerplate service_files = self._generate_service_code(service_name, extraction_plan) files_created.extend(service_files) # Generate routing configuration routing_config = self._generate_routing_config(service_name) files_created.append(routing_config) # Generate deployment manifests k8s_files = self._generate_k8s_manifests(service_name) files_created.extend(k8s_files) # Generate migration steps migration_plan = self._generate_migration_steps(service_name, extraction_plan) return files_created def _generate_routing_config(self, service_name: str) -> str: """Generate nginx routing for gradual traffic migration""" nginx_config = f"""# Strangler fig routing for {service_name}upstream legacy_backend {{ server legacy-monolith:8080;}}
upstream {service_name}_backend {{ server {service_name}-service:8080;}}
server {{ listen 80; location ~* ^/api/{service_name}/(.*) {{ # Feature flag based routing set $backend legacy_backend; # Route percentage of traffic to new service if ($arg_migrate = "true") {{ set $backend {service_name}_backend; }} proxy_pass http://$backend/api/$1$is_args$args; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; }} location / {{ proxy_pass http://legacy_backend; }}}}""" nginx_file = f"infrastructure/nginx/{service_name}-routing.conf" os.makedirs(os.path.dirname(nginx_file), exist_ok=True) with open(nginx_file, 'w') as f: f.write(nginx_config) return nginx_fileCommon failure mode: Teams attempt to extract services without understanding data consistency requirements. E-commerce systems often need transactional consistency across inventory, pricing, and order data. Always identify ACID transaction boundaries before service extraction and plan for eventual consistency patterns where strong consistency isn't possible.
What You Should Do Next
E-commerce development succeeds when treating AI agents as system-aware teammates who understand the complete architecture, not just autocomplete tools. Start with autonomous cart refactoring on the most problematic legacy flow. Even if the team thinks they understand the business logic completely, most teams discover their mental model of cart state management is incomplete, and agents catch the edge cases that break checkout at 3am during flash sales.
Deploy the cart logic refactoring agent on a single service in staging environment this week. Run it against the most complex checkout flow and review the generated refactoring plan. Teams quickly discover whether their agents have the large-context capabilities needed for production e-commerce work.
Molisha Shah
GTM and Customer Champion