User Workflow: Using Claude.ai for Planning and Claude Code for Implementation

Workflow Details

A developer on r/ClaudeAI describes a specific workflow using two separate Claude tools: Claude.ai for planning and Claude Code for implementation. The user deliberately splits work between the tools because Claude Code is "eager to solve problems" and sometimes takes "the quickest path rather than the best one," potentially introducing subtle bugs by racing to complete tasks.

In contrast, conversations with Claude.ai are described as "more thorough." The user shows Claude.ai summaries of what Claude Code has done, and Claude.ai catches issues that Claude Code misses or gets wrong, including mistakes, overcomplicated approaches, or deviations from specifications.

Phased Implementation Process

The workflow follows this pattern:

• Discuss the feature or problem in Claude.ai until understanding implications and agreeing on an approach.
• Claude.ai writes a detailed implementation plan that breaks work into separate phases, each with a specific prompt for Claude Code.
• Take the first phase prompt to Claude Code for implementation.
• Test the result and provide summary to Claude.ai for review.
• If issues are found, return to Claude.ai to determine why and how to fix.
• Only move to the next phase once the current one works correctly.
• Repeat until complete.

The user states this phased approach is "the only way I have found to keep quality high as a non-technical solo founder," noting that dumping the entire plan into Claude Code at once leads to corner-cutting or losing track of requirements.

Current Limitations

The main problem identified is that "these two tools have zero shared state." This requires the user to act as "the human clipboard," copying plans from Claude.ai and pasting them into Claude Code. When Claude Code changes files, Claude.ai has no awareness unless files are manually re-uploaded to the project knowledge folder.

The user wants a shared project workspace where both Claude.ai and Claude Code can read and write the same files, with planning on one side and implementation on the other, both having the latest context. They suggest even shared markdown files would suffice.

The user asks about potential solutions using Notion, Obsidian, or Google Drive as shared memory, but notes that Claude.ai cannot access these directly.