Two of your teams have the same headcount and similar agent spend. One ships steadily. The other is always firefighting. You suspect they use agents very differently, but you can't see how.
The Problem
Team-level questions about agents get answered with anecdotes from standups. Is one team handing whole features to the agent while another uses it for tests? Does one plan before it builds? Without a view per team, you can't spread what works or spot what doesn't.
How It Cascades
Practices that work stay inside one team.
Struggling teams get generic advice instead of specific help.
Headcount and budget conversations ignore how differently teams work.
The Insight
How a team works with agents shows up in the shape of its sessions: what kind of work they're for, whether they plan and test, how often they need rework, and who steers.
The Solution
In VibeCheck, each team's page shows its tokens or estimated cost over 4, 8 or 12 weeks, its work mix (feature, bugfix, debugging, refactor, infra, review, explore), and its session patterns: how often sessions plan, test, review and rework, how clear the asks were, whether the person or the agent led, and how many corrections a session takes. The Teams list shows each team's sessions and subagent split. Open any person on the team for the same view of their own work.
The Outcome
You can name what the steady team does differently, share it with the team that's struggling, and check a month later whether their patterns moved.