The software factory is already here.

A small agent harness does not stay small because its maintainers have good taste. It stays small because new capability has somewhere else to go.

The expensive model may break less. That does not make it your safest default. It means your factory has another routing signal.

A tool can sit inside thousands of products and still fail as a business. Your dependency plan has to survive both facts at once.

Code is getting cheaper. Knowing what should exist is not. If that judgment still lives inside one talented person's head, you have not removed the bottleneck. You have renamed it.

If your AI champion gets a few protected hours and all of their old work, you have not funded transformation. You have scheduled a conflict that ordinary work will win.

Agent-written code does not make quality disappear. It makes a weak quality system fail faster and a strong one learn faster.

An agent can do most of the work and still control almost none of the outcome. That is not a contradiction. It is an operating design.

When agents write the code, the valuable engineer is no longer the fastest person at the keyboard. It is the person who can make a claim survive contact with evidence.

A software factory can have a dashboard, an agent roster, shared projects, reusable skills, and a polished review room. None of that proves it can ship one accountable change.

When an agent can install a new capability while it works, the plugin is no longer an accessory. It is a live change to the factory.

A flat monthly plan can make agent capacity feel unlimited. Build your operation around that feeling and the pricing model will eventually collect the difference.

When agents create work faster than your system can accept it, more parallelism is not more capacity. It is a larger pile of unfinished decisions.