I think the key aspect of this is how you capture iterative refinement. One can capture a high level intent ("Build a webpage with widgets to accomplish foo", o

I think the key aspect of this is how you capture iterative refinement. One can capture a high level intent ("Build a webpage with widgets to accomplish foo", or "Buy me tickets to the playoff game") But upon inspection there are fractally increasing levels of details that need further specification. For the webpage - say authorization requirements or visual design details just as an example. Or for the tickets ... which seats? what cost is acceptable? if the next best seat is just slightly more than the state budget is the tradeoff worth it? What about the special bundle that includes some sort of promotional item, worth it? And if it is worth it this time, does that apply next time? For code-technical decisions, design documents, or the code itself provide a good record for the ever increasing details and scope, but we certainly haven't found the best way to capture everything. Perennial debates about code documentation, or what should go in PRs, or literate-style programing and more show we haven't figured it out. But at the same time, I definitely find myself having non-productive slack conversations, or PR threads or whatever, when my colleague (or myself) prompts: "hangout?" or similar to have call and talk through the issue. Something about the real-time conversation is able to cut-through written mis-communication very well - which then can be captured back in text for the benefits of other colleagues.