claude-code-ultimate-guide/cowork/workflows/team-handoff.md
Florian BRUNIAUX c2de35caba docs: complete Cowork documentation v1.0 (Phase 2)
- Create comprehensive Cowork docs (23 files in cowork/)
  - 6 guides: overview, getting started, capabilities, security, troubleshooting
  - 60+ ready-to-use prompts across 4 categories
  - 5 step-by-step workflows
  - Reference materials: cheatsheet, FAQ, comparison, glossary

- Integrate Perplexity research (P0/P1/P2)
  - Exact error messages with solutions (VPN, Chrome host, context limits)
  - Competitive analysis (vs Copilot/Gemini/ChatGPT/Apple Intelligence)
  - Enterprise validation (TELUS, Rakuten, Zapier stats)
  - OCR accuracy benchmarks (97% field, 63% line-item)
  - Token budget planning per task type

- Document critical limitations
  - VPN incompatibility (#1 community issue)
  - Context limit reality (165K vs 200K theoretical)
  - Platform constraints (macOS only)
  - Usage limits and pricing (Pro $20, Max $100-200)

- Update central files
  - README.md: detailed Cowork section with tables
  - VERSION: 3.9.6 → 3.9.7
  - machine-readable/reference.yaml: add cowork_reference entry
  - machine-readable/cowork-reference.yaml: new LLM-optimized index (~1.5K tokens)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-01-20 11:23:43 +01:00

8.6 KiB

Workflow: Team Handoff (Dev ↔ Non-Dev)

Estimated time: 30 minutes Difficulty: Advanced


Use Case

Your team has both technical (developers using Claude Code) and non-technical members (PMs, analysts using Cowork). This workflow enables:

  • Seamless handoff between Claude Code and Cowork
  • Shared context and documentation
  • Complementary capabilities
  • Efficient collaboration

Prerequisites

  • Shared folder accessible to both team members
  • Claude Code for developer
  • Cowork for non-technical member
  • Agreed conventions (folder structure, naming)

Setting Up Shared Infrastructure

Step 1: Create Shared Workspace

# On developer's machine (or shared drive)
mkdir -p ~/Shared/{specs,docs,research,data,handoff}

Step 2: Create Shared CLAUDE.md

Both Claude Code and Cowork can reference this context file:

# ~/Shared/CLAUDE.md

## Project: [Project Name]

### Folder Conventions
- `/specs/` - Technical specifications (from dev)
- `/docs/` - Business documents (from PM/analyst)
- `/research/` - Research materials (either)
- `/data/` - Data files for analysis
- `/handoff/` - Active handoff items

### Active Items
- [List current work items]

### Team
- Dev: [Name] - Uses Claude Code
- PM: [Name] - Uses Cowork
- Analyst: [Name] - Uses Cowork

### Current Sprint
- [Sprint goals]

### Key Decisions
- [Important decisions with dates]

Pattern 1: Developer → PM Handoff

Scenario: Developer creates technical spec, PM needs stakeholder summary.

Developer (Claude Code)

# Developer creates technical specification
claude "Create a technical specification for the authentication system.
Include: architecture diagram (text), API endpoints, data models,
security considerations, and implementation phases.
Save to ~/Shared/specs/auth-spec.md"

PM (Cowork)

Read the technical spec at ~/Shared/specs/auth-spec.md

Create a stakeholder summary document that:
1. Explains the feature in non-technical terms
2. Highlights business benefits
3. Identifies timeline and phases
4. Lists resource needs
5. Flags any risks or dependencies

Format: Word document for presentation
Save to: ~/Shared/docs/auth-stakeholder-summary.docx

Handoff File

Create a handoff note:

Create a handoff note at ~/Shared/handoff/auth-handoff.md

Include:
- Source: ~/Shared/specs/auth-spec.md
- Created by: [Dev name]
- Date: [today]
- Destination: ~/Shared/docs/auth-stakeholder-summary.docx
- Created by: [PM name]
- Status: Ready for stakeholder review
- Next steps: [what happens next]

Pattern 2: Research → Implementation

Scenario: Analyst does competitive research, developer implements based on findings.

Analyst (Cowork)

Research competitors' pricing pages for our industry.

For each competitor:
- Screenshot (via Chrome)
- Pricing tiers and features
- UX patterns observed
- What works well / what doesn't

Create:
1. ~/Shared/research/pricing-comparison.xlsx (detailed matrix)
2. ~/Shared/research/pricing-analysis.md (summary and recommendations)
3. ~/Shared/research/screenshots/ (reference images)

Developer (Claude Code)

# Developer reads research and implements
claude "Review the competitive research at ~/Shared/research/

Based on the analysis:
1. Create a pricing page component that incorporates best practices identified
2. Follow the recommended tier structure from pricing-analysis.md
3. Use our existing design system

Implementation should be in src/pages/pricing/"

Pattern 3: Data Analyst → Developer

Scenario: Analyst identifies data patterns, developer needs to build features.

Analyst (Cowork)

Analyze the user data in ~/Shared/data/user-metrics.csv

Create analysis report:
1. Key user behavior patterns
2. Most common user journeys
3. Drop-off points
4. Feature usage statistics
5. Recommendations for product improvements

Save to: ~/Shared/docs/user-analysis.docx
Include: charts-data.xlsx for any visualizations

Developer (Claude Code)

# Developer builds features based on analysis
claude "Review the user analysis at ~/Shared/docs/user-analysis.docx

Based on the drop-off points identified:
1. Implement improvements to reduce friction
2. Add analytics tracking for recommended metrics
3. Create A/B test framework for suggested changes

Start with the highest-impact recommendation."

Pattern 4: Bidirectional Collaboration

Scenario: Ongoing collaboration on a document/feature.

Shared Document Workflow

PM starts:

Create a PRD (Product Requirements Document) for the new dashboard feature.

Structure:
1. Problem Statement
2. User Stories
3. Requirements (functional)
4. Success Metrics
5. [Technical Requirements - TO BE FILLED BY DEV]
6. Timeline
7. Open Questions

Save to: ~/Shared/docs/dashboard-prd.docx

Developer adds:

claude "Read the PRD at ~/Shared/docs/dashboard-prd.docx

Add a Technical Requirements section:
- Architecture approach
- API endpoints needed
- Data models
- Performance requirements
- Technical risks

Save updated version to same location."

PM finalizes:

Review the updated PRD at ~/Shared/docs/dashboard-prd.docx

Add:
- Timeline based on technical requirements
- Resource allocation
- Final open questions

Create final version: ~/Shared/docs/dashboard-prd-final.docx

Handoff Protocols

Standard Handoff Template

# Handoff: [Item Name]

## Source
- **File**: [path to source file]
- **Created by**: [name]
- **Date**: [date]
- **Tool used**: [Claude Code / Cowork]

## Destination
- **Expected output**: [what should be created]
- **Owner**: [who will process this]
- **Due**: [deadline if any]

## Context
[Any important context for the recipient]

## Instructions
[Specific instructions for processing]

## Dependencies
- [Any files or information needed]

## Completion Criteria
- [ ] [Criterion 1]
- [ ] [Criterion 2]

Notification System

Create a simple notification file:

# ~/Shared/handoff/INBOX.md

## Pending Items

### [Date] - [Item Name]
- From: [sender]
- To: [recipient]
- Priority: [High/Medium/Low]
- Handoff file: [link]
- Status: [ ] Pending / [x] Received / [ ] Complete

Best Practices

1. Consistent Naming

Agree on naming conventions:
- specs/[feature]-spec.md
- docs/[feature]-summary.docx
- research/[topic]-analysis.md
- handoff/[date]-[item]-handoff.md

2. Clear Ownership

Each file should indicate:

  • Who created it
  • Who should process it
  • Current status

3. Version Tracking

Use date prefixes for versions:
- 2024-01-15-dashboard-prd-v1.docx
- 2024-01-20-dashboard-prd-v2.docx

4. Status Updates

Update the shared CLAUDE.md with current status:

### Active Handoffs
| Item | From | To | Status | Due |
|------|------|-----|--------|-----|
| Auth spec | Dev | PM | In review | Jan 20 |

5. Feedback Loop

After each handoff:

Create feedback note at ~/Shared/handoff/feedback/[item]-feedback.md

Include:
- What worked well
- What was missing
- Suggestions for next time

Troubleshooting

Cowork can't read Claude Code output

Issue: Format incompatibility or location mismatch

Solution:

  • Ensure files are in shared location
  • Use standard formats (.md, .docx, .xlsx)
  • Avoid code-specific formats

Context lost between tools

Issue: Each tool starts fresh

Solution:

  • Use CLAUDE.md for persistent context
  • Include relevant background in each prompt
  • Reference source files explicitly

Conflicting edits

Issue: Both tools editing same file

Solution:

  • Use clear ownership per file
  • Create new versions instead of editing
  • Lock files during active work

Example: Complete Feature Cycle

Phase 1: Research (Cowork)

Research notification best practices.
Save to ~/Shared/research/notifications-research.md

Phase 2: Spec (Claude Code)

claude "Based on research at ~/Shared/research/notifications-research.md,
create technical spec at ~/Shared/specs/notifications-spec.md"

Phase 3: Documentation (Cowork)

Create user-facing documentation based on
~/Shared/specs/notifications-spec.md
Save to ~/Shared/docs/notifications-user-guide.docx

Phase 4: Implementation (Claude Code)

claude "Implement notifications feature per
~/Shared/specs/notifications-spec.md"

Phase 5: Release Notes (Cowork)

Create release notes for stakeholders based on:
- ~/Shared/specs/notifications-spec.md
- ~/Shared/docs/notifications-user-guide.docx

Save to ~/Shared/docs/notifications-release.docx

Back to Workflows | Cowork Documentation