What if Claude could understand “how humans use your product”?

Claude knows your codebase. But it has no clue “how humans *actually* use your product”. What if it could… I have been thinking about what it unlocks for test automation: 1. Identify untested behaviours and add tests 2. Understand where users are struggling -> check for UX frictions (is there a big JS being loaded slowing down the page? A localization bug?) 3. Capture user segments, write realistic test fixtures that emulate them All of it - prioritized by usage signals - frequency, time spent etc. Beyond testing - it could even catch errors and raise PRs to fix, without you needing to monitor and tell “what to fix”, or even come up with product improvement ideas! This is why instrumentation is one of the best “investments” teams can do today as they move to agentic coding. Historically, this used to be a prohibitively expensive task since you had to: 1. Decide which events to track 2. Decide Metadata and slicing dimensions for each event (user.role, plan, region, etc.) 3. Get everyone aligned on naming and vocabulary 4. Add instrumentation in the right places 5. Repeat after every PR and every feature Even disciplined teams struggled to maintain this process. And after all that work, someone still had to stare at dashboards and decide what mattered. But agentic coding changes the economics. All of the above can now be a background task done autonomously - for each PR - by Claude. What would you do - if Claude could learn user behaviour of your app and use it as a feedback loop?