I've been integrating ICM into my workflow for the past two months, and I realized something crucial. ICM isn't just about reducing token consumption. It's about making your workflow portable. Once your workflow is built around ICM instead of a specific IDE or LLM, switching between tools becomes almost effortless. That means I can use each IDE and LLM for what it does best. Antigravity for rapid building. Cursor for polishing. Claude Code for deep engineering. Whatever comes next only requires a little tuning instead of rebuilding my entire workflow. The workflow stays the same. The tools become interchangeable.

Big update! I brought 2 new team members into our shared workspace today. There are 4 of us all with our own private ICMs with a forked repo for shared files which includes client folders, agents, skills, and doctrine. 2 more team members made the training but skipped setting up their ICMs today. We recorded the session for 3 others that couldn't make it. From start to finish (download of vs-code to fully trained and functioning) completed in 2 hours. By end of June we should have 6-10 team members all in our org using their own personal ICM connected to a shared repo that runs the entire organization. I can't wait to see what these team members start to build for themselves when they start to realize the power they have at their fingertips.

Most of what I see in here is about automating tasks. Building workflows, connecting tools, making things run faster. I've been learning all of it and it's clicking.But I kept hitting a wall that I couldn't name for a while. I was using an LLM app as my operating system. Not just for tasks but for decision-making, project navigation, thinking through problems, tracking where things stood across different work. And it kept falling apart. Sessions ended, context disappeared, drift compounded quietly. By the time something felt wrong, I was already deep in the wrong direction. I lost real work to it. The problem wasn't the tool. The problem was the category error. A workflow system automates a process you already understand. You know the steps, you know the inputs and outputs, you want to run it reliably and faster. It's execution. It shines when the process is stable. A reasoning system is what you need before that. It's the thinking partner that helps you figure out what the process should even be, especially when you're building something from scratch and the process doesn't exist yet. You can't automate your way to a decision you haven't made yet. I was treating a reasoning tool like a workflow system. No persistent state, no routing logic, no structure, just conversation. It can't hold a project together. That's not what it's for. So I've been building what I'm calling CoworkOS, based on ICM principles, a folder architecture that gives Claude a stable structure to operate within across sessions. Routing tables, layered context files, memory that persists. The idea is: before you build workflows inside your projects, you might need an operating layer that actually runs the reasoning coherently. I don't know if this is the right approach yet. Still figuring it out. But the distinction feels important, especially if you're newer to this and trying to figure out where to start. Workflows are powerful once you know what you're automating. The reasoning layer is what gets you there.

My father told me to share this project me and Claude made! Its a homework tracker that has been very helpful for me.

A Claude code Eng just dropped this. Anyone been doing this switch yet or will try? Curious to see what @Jake Van Clief has to say. It’s a file still just a different format. Same thing right… thoughts? Pros and cons? Here to learn and discover https://x.com/trq212/status/2052809885763747935?s=46&t=Ayzo8Ebbgb8PZhLNm057bg