🔍 Read the full analysis: The AI-Agent Workflow Behind Gewerkton’s Two-Day Relaunch on ThorstenMeyerAI.com

Gewerkton, a construction-site documentation tool, says it replaced the look of its web app, phone apps, Studio, icons and multilingual website with a design called HORIZON over Oct. 2 and 3, 2026. The company’s publisher, Thorsten Meyer, says AI coding agents carried out the implementation from written plans, while he approved the plans, reviewed results and released each part, as detailed in the original account.

The changes covered the web app, iPhone and Android apps, Studio, 26 icons and 529 website pages in 40 languages. Gewerkton says its web app had 281 hard-coded colour values moved into design tokens, with 11 exceptions retained, and 47 cards restyled. The phone app moved to version 0.5.0, and the Studio received the design in light and dark modes. All 26 icons were re-rendered in Blender in cobalt and navy.

The website’s new opening section uses product screens. The company says it uploaded 1,583 files without an error and produced 228 AI film runs for five regions, including 222 runs with regional versions, plus eight help videos. Those figures come from the publisher’s account; no independent audit or supporting data is included in the source material.

Meyer says the agents worked in a separate copy of the code on their own branch. Each part had to pass tests and a visual check before he released it. Film reruns that incurred a charge required his explicit approval, and films showing the revised interface were held until he had seen and approved the interface on Oct. 3. Apple’s license agreement also blocked an iPhone build until Meyer accepted it himself.

Human Checks Set Release Boundaries

The account offers a specific example of how an AI-agent workflow can divide implementation from release authority. Agents handled code and production tasks, but Meyer retained approval and release control, including decisions involving spending and app distribution. That distinction matters to teams considering automation: the reported speed depended on prepared plans, staged work and human review, not on an agent receiving an unrestricted instruction to redesign and publish everything.

The relaunch also shows why test results alone may not catch every defect. Gewerkton reports that its automated checks passed for the phone app, Studio and website, yet a visual review found white icon tiles that obscured labels in dark mode. Film recolouring tools also missed red in shadows and warm lighting. These examples make the company’s claimed turnaround harder to assess by headline numbers alone: the workflow included manual inspection, rejected outputs and corrective work.

The figures may interest product teams, but they are publisher-reported results from a project built by the publisher. They do not establish that similar timelines, test outcomes or costs would apply to other software or teams. Gewerkton’s own disclosure says Meyer and his company built the product and documented what they learned.

A Draft Preceded the Two-Day Push

The phrase “two days” has a qualification: an interim design draft dated Sept. 26 was carried into the Oct. 2–3 work. Gewerkton describes the two-day period as execution, from approved plan to live website, rather than a complete design process that began from a blank page on Oct. 2. The company says it is built in Iffeldorf, Bavaria, by Meyer, who directs a fleet of AI coding agents including Codex and Claude.

Before implementation, the plan listed open decisions, options and recommendations. Meyer approved the recommendations. When work deviated from the plan, the deviation was logged and the conservative option was chosen. One example concerned the brand’s cobalt: its contrast against a light background measured 4.38:1, below Gewerkton’s stated working standard of 4.5:1 under WCAG 2.1 AA. The colour was darkened until the reported contrast reached 4.80:1.

Gewerkton says the web app was checked across 200 views, four languages—English, German, Japanese and Hindi—and widths of 390, 834 and 1,440 pixels, in light and dark modes. The phone app passed 853 of 853 tests and Studio passed 2,158 of 2,158. The website passed seven test suites and was checked in five regions at the same widths, including another run after upload.

„“The two days cover the execution, from the approved plan to the live website.”“

— Thorsten Meyer, Gewerkton’s builder and publisher

Independent Checks Are Not Provided

The available account is Gewerkton’s own description, and the publisher discloses that it built the product. The source material does not provide independent verification of the test totals, upload count, production time or film figures, nor does it describe the full cost of the relaunch. It says the film project’s records show about $134 in actual costs, but the supplied text ends before explaining what that figure covers.

Some test failures also remain part of the picture. Gewerkton reports eight failing web-app tests across seven files; six files fail the same way on the main branch, while another depends on test order and passes when run alone. The company says these failures were not caused by the redesign, but the redesign did not fix them. The source does not give a separate independent assessment of that explanation.

It is also unclear from the account how the reported labour and elapsed time compare with a conventional development process, or whether all regional film versions are now complete. Ten versions with leftover red were temporarily switched to the European cut; nine were later reshot with Meyer’s approval and passed visual checks.

Version 0.5.1 Holds App Fixes

Gewerkton says five major findings from an Android test on a Pixel 10a are scheduled for version 0.5.1, with none classed as a blocker. One example was camera-screen buttons breaking words across lines after larger type and additional padding were introduced; the German word for “cancel” now wraps onto two lines.

The company also reports that nine regional film runs were reshot after a visual review. The source does not give a date for version 0.5.1 or say when the remaining temporary European-cut replacements will be reshot. Further updates would clarify whether those fixes have shipped and whether all planned regional assets have returned to their intended versions.

Key Questions

What did Gewerkton relaunch?

Gewerkton applied its HORIZON design to its web app, iPhone and Android apps, Studio, 26 icons and website, which it says includes 529 pages in 40 languages.

What does the two-day timeline cover?

According to Gewerkton, the Oct. 2–3 period covers implementation from an approved plan to a live website. An interim design draft dated Sept. 26 was already available, so the design did not start from scratch during those two days.

What role did the AI agents have?

Gewerkton says its Codex and Claude agents carried out implementation from written plans on a separate code branch. Thorsten Meyer approved the plan, reviewed outputs and released each part; he also authorized paid film reruns and accepted Apple’s license agreement.

Were all the reported tests successful?

No. The phone app and Studio passed their reported test totals, and the website passed seven suites. The web app still had eight failing tests across seven files; Gewerkton says most failures also occur on the main branch and another passes when run alone.

What remains to be fixed?

Gewerkton says five findings from an Android Pixel 10a test are scheduled for version 0.5.1. It has not provided a release date. The account also says some regional film versions were temporarily replaced with the European cut, with nine later reshot.

Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com