AX notes · Measured case

How we shipped four Android apps in 20 days with an AI coding agent

Working with an AI coding agent (Claude Code), a solo developer published four Android apps on Google Play in the 20 days from the first commit on September 20, 2026 to October 10.

By SugarMount Retrospectives and numbers 5 min read Last updated

In that period 52 of 59 commits (88%) are marked as co-authored with the agent. Besides the AI writing code fast, each app was stamped out from the same template, one at a time, and pre-release checks and Play Console work were turned into scripts.

The numbers come from the git history, CHANGELOG and on-device QA reports of SugarMount's app repository (sugar-utils), as of October 18, 2026.

Contents (6)
  1. What happened in those 20 days?
  2. How was the work split between the person and the AI?
  3. Four rules that made it fast
  4. What went wrong?
  5. If you want to try it
  6. Frequently asked questions

What happened in those 20 days?

DateWhat was done
09-20Repository started. The skeleton of the first app, Compress Image, and the shared file, image, ads and analytics modules written in parallel by several agents in separate git worktrees
09-21First signed AAB (1.0.0). A script that uploads builds and store listings through the Play Developer API
09-23An R8 problem that crashed the release build right after launch found on a real device (Galaxy S23) and fixed
09-24The second app, Flip & Rotate Image, and the third, Convert Image, generated from the scaffolding script and uploaded to the internal test track
09-25On-device QA of all three apps on a Galaxy S21 by four agents in turn (one per app, then one independent cross-check)
10-03First app's store page live
10-04Defects from end-to-end tests on a Galaxy S20 and S21 fixed; all three apps released to production
10-10Fourth app, HWP Viewer SugarDoc, store page live

41 of the 59 commits (69%) were made between 9 p.m. and 2 a.m.

Bar chart: of 59 commits, 52 (88%) are marked as co-authored with the agent and 41 (69%) were made between 9 p.m. and 2 a.m.
52 of the 59 commits in those 20 days were made with the agent, and 41 were made in the evening.

How was the work split between the person and the AI?

AI agent

  • Kotlin code and unit tests
  • Build, release and QA scripts
  • Store listing drafts, screenshot capture and framing
  • Emulator and device tests, with written reports

Person

  • Decisions such as ad placement, prices and tone of copy (recorded with a date in the instruction file)
  • Work that only the Play Console can do
  • Connecting real devices and the final check
  • The decision to release to production

The co-author mark means the commit was made together with the agent. It is not a measure of who wrote how many lines.

Four rules that made it fast

  1. One app at a time, shared code in modules: File saving, image processing, job state, ads, billing and analytics live in core/ modules, not in an app. From the second app on, only the screens and the app's own feature are new.
  2. Stamp out the next app with a script: new_app.sh copies the first app, changes its name, colour and icon, and blanks every per-app identifier to PLACEHOLDER. Its first real run (09-23) exposed four bugs, which were fixed; the next day the third app was generated without a single change.
  3. Let a gate stop easy mistakes: A release build is not produced while an ad test ID remains or an identifier is empty. Rules do not stop at the instruction file; tests enforce them (the AGENTS.md note).
  4. Console work through APIs: AAB uploads, ko and en store listings, 30 screenshots per app, in-app products, Firebase projects and GA4 properties are all created by scripts. What a person does in the console is only what the APIs do not expose.

A new app refused API requests until it had been touched in the console first (the first AAB upload, or granting the service account access), and AdMob's app-creation API is limited-access and returned 403. So AdMob apps and ad units are created in the console, and a script reads their IDs into the config file.

What went wrong?

Comparison: at first end-to-end tests ran after submitting for review and found nine major defects with five causes; now they run before submission, and the release build is launched twice on a device before every upload.
On-device end-to-end tests now come before submission; on October 4 the order was backwards.

If you want to try it

  1. Start with the instruction file: Write down only the rules the agent tends to get wrong, briefly. Keep history elsewhere.
  2. Take the first app all the way: Only after one app reaches a public store page do you see what to automate.
  3. Script the pre-release checks: Make the gate, a release-build launch and an on-device check mandatory before any upload.
  4. Record what was and wasn't verified: In the changelog, write which device checked what, and what was not checked.

Frequently asked questions

Did the AI write all the code?

By commit, 88% carry the AI co-author mark. The person made design decisions, reviewed results, checked on devices and decided on releases. The mark shows collaboration, not a share of lines.

Can one person keep quality up this way?

Largely, if checks live in scripts and tests rather than in someone's memory. Even so, on-device end-to-end tests found nine major defects.

Four apps in 20 days: are they simple apps?

Yes, deliberately: each does one thing. Shrinking photos, flipping and rotating, converting formats, viewing Korean documents. The HWP viewer, though, carries a document engine that opens HWP, HWPX and PDF on the device, and it has kept getting updates since.

Which apps are they?

Compress Image, Flip & Rotate Image, Convert Image and HWP Viewer SugarDoc. All are on Google Play.

This note is written from values SugarMount measured itself; an AI coding agent was used to draft it.

All notes on Retrospectives and numbers · All AX notes