Capture the rules once. Challenge every replacement.
Explore how shared characterization fixtures, a bounded comparison and domain review can reduce repeated analysis while improving confidence in a COBOL migration.
Establish the baseline
- COBOL source and copybooks
- Job definitions and sample records
- Approved reference outputs
Evidence to retain
- Reusable reference fixtures
- Bounded approach comparison
- Reconciliation and domain decisions
Why work this way?
The process, and what it could improve.
Cost
Turn domain explanations into reusable fixtures.
Capture record layouts, decimal behavior and accepted outputs before translating code. Share those artifacts with implementation and review workers.
- What to compare
- Model charges and domain-expert effort per reconciled capability, including fixture creation and unexplained differences.
- The tradeoff
- Characterization costs effort upfront and may expose missing knowledge that expands the work.
Turn domain explanations into reusable fixtures.
Compare the same scope and acceptance criteria. Include setup, coordination, failed attempts and human review alongside the successful model call.
Design the work
One problem. A coordinated agent team.
A model reasons. A harness runs its agent session and tool loop. Orchard coordinates the work, context and handoffs across them.
Orchestration phase 1: Split the work. Preserve the question.
Implementation lead
01Map copybooks, JCL, file layouts and callers; propose an API seam around the selected capability.
Counterproposal agent
02Assume the rules are incompletely documented. Challenge the replacement with precision, encoding and restart cases.
Independent reviewer
03Reconcile old/new outputs and separate exact matches, explained differences and unresolved behavior.
Rules · skills · hooks · MCP configuration
Adapted to each harnessSplit the work. Preserve the question.
One objective, distinct responsibilities
Replace a bounded COBOL capability with a modern service while preserving its business semantics.
dependency-map.md + service contractgolden-master fixtures + semantic-differences.mdreconciliation report + cutover questionsModel families and pairings are illustrative. Assignments here are manual examples, not measured model comparisons or automatic cost optimization.
Inspect the example work orderJSON
An illustrative work-order format for this scenario. Changing an example session updates this document; no agents run from this page.
{
"example": "cobol-modernization",
"objective": "Replace a bounded COBOL capability with a modern service while preserving its business semantics.",
"boundary": "Approved legacy outputs are the comparison baseline. No production retirement follows from code translation alone.",
"sessions": [
{
"role": "proposer",
"model_family": "Claude",
"harness": "Claude Code",
"task": "Map copybooks, JCL, file layouts and callers; propose an API seam around the selected capability.",
"expected_artifact": "dependency-map.md + service contract"
},
{
"role": "challenger",
"model_family": "GPT",
"harness": "Codex CLI",
"task": "Assume the rules are incompletely documented. Challenge the replacement with precision, encoding and restart cases.",
"expected_artifact": "golden-master fixtures + semantic-differences.md"
},
{
"role": "reviewer",
"model_family": "Gemini",
"harness": "Gemini CLI",
"task": "Reconcile old/new outputs and separate exact matches, explained differences and unresolved behavior.",
"expected_artifact": "reconciliation report + cutover questions"
}
],
"project_contract": [
"Rules",
"Skills",
"Hooks",
"Tool configuration"
],
"shared_context": [
"Legacy knowledge",
"Decision record"
],
"evidence_required": [
{
"label": "Money reconciles",
"evidence": "Compare exact decimal values, signs, rounding and invalid-record handling."
},
{
"label": "Operational behavior holds",
"evidence": "Test job ordering, partial failure, restart and duplicate input."
},
{
"label": "Differences are explained",
"evidence": "Have a domain expert disposition every material discrepancy."
}
],
"release_owner_gate": "A domain expert and operations owner accept reconciliation and cutover readiness before production traffic moves."
}Chapter 1: Find the rules behind the transactions.
Chapter 01 / 04
Find the rules behind the transactions.
Trace copybooks, jobs, file access, and external dependencies. Work with domain experts to identify behavior the replacement must preserve.
Analysis agents + domain expert
Business-rule inventory
Copybooks → processing rules → dependenciesThe process principle
Judge the process by reconciled behavior.
Scope of this exampleRuntime and database choices follow discovery. Parallel comparisons support review; they do not establish universal business equivalence.
A proposed modernization approach. No production conversion or performance result is claimed. Incremental replacement pattern






