Agents In Use
What’s new todayLast update
— use cases added today

Devin renames Neon docs with human cleanup

Neon reports Devin finding old feature terminology across its documentation, but replacement errors required more than twenty manual commits to finish the rename.

Published neon.comAgent: Devin
OUR ADAPTATION

Suggested prompt

Suggested prompt written by Agents In Use, not the source author. Replace bracketed inputs and review tool permissions first.

Find references to this retired feature name across the docs and propose context-aware edits. Preserve meaning, flag ambiguous cases and present the diff for editorial review before merging.

Evidence at a glance

Sourced account
Original account
Read the source ↗
Published
23 Jun 2025
Source link checked
15 Oct 2026
Reported result
Neon reports Devin finding old feature terminology across its documentation, but replacement errors required more than twenty manual commits to finish the rename.
Human involvement
The docs team reviews generated PRs and manually corrects context and terminology. The source reports more than twenty cleanup commits.

A linked account supports attribution. It does not mean we independently reproduced its result.

Report an issue with this caseOpen correction email

Opens your email app with the case link included. Nothing is sent automatically.

How the agent did it

  1. The docs team asks Devin to find old feature names and rename them Instant Restore.
  2. Devin locates nearly all relevant references across the documentation set.
  3. The team inspects replacement errors in the generated changes.

Neon's documentation team tried Devin on recurring changelog preparation, issue-driven updates and larger edits. A concrete larger task renamed references to history retention and point-in-time recovery to Instant Restore across its documentation set.

The team gave the agent the terminology change and let it search the repository. Devin found nearly every relevant location, reducing the manual discovery work. Its edits, however, relied too heavily on replacement and created awkward constructions such as a duplicated word in the new name. Price and Grenon report that more than twenty manual commits were needed to polish the result.

This account separates locating affected text from making a contextually correct revision. The discovered references were useful even though the final prose still required substantial human attention. It would be inaccurate to describe the rename as autonomously completed documentation maintenance.

The authors also report other bounded successes, such as starting weekly changelog files from a playbook and finding an appropriate existing screenshot for a small feature document. More ambiguous work could fail silently. Their observed pattern was to delegate clearly scoped repository work and inspect the resulting pull request, with technical writing judgment and final acceptance remaining in the team.

Prompt
Suggested prompt (written by Agents In Use, not the author's)

Source: neon.com · Daniel Price and Barry Grenon

Frequently asked questions

What did the agent find successfully?

Nearly every location using the old feature terminology.

What required human correction?

Direct replacement produced awkward wording, including a repeated word in the new name.

Was the rename completed unattended?

No. The team reports more than twenty manual commits to polish the changes.

More details

Remaining steps

  1. More than twenty manual commits finish and polish the rename.

About this account

Devin located nearly all old product terms and made replacement edits across documentation, including incorrect repeated wording.

Firsthand account opened and read. Outcome is source-reported, not independently reproduced. Suggested prompt written by Agents In Use. Source reports both useful discovery and extensive manual correction. No claim of autonomous final acceptance.

Credit: Daniel Price and Barry Grenon

Source published 23 Jun 2025

Source checked 15 Oct 2026

Tools and topics

Devin · GitHub · Documentation repo

Devin · GitHub · Documentation repo

Editorial completeness: 100/100. Measures documented fields, not agent performance or verified outcomes.