Using AI to code doesn't mean sacrificing craftsmanship. It shifts the craftsman's role from writing every line to being a director with a strong vision. The key is measuring the AI's output against that vision and ensuring each piece fits the larger puzzle correctly, not just functionally.

AI code editors can be tasked with high-level goals like "fix lint errors." The agent will then independently run necessary commands, interpret the output, apply code changes, and re-run the commands to verify the fix, all without direct human intervention or step-by-step instructions.

As AI generates more code than humans can review, the validation bottleneck emerges. The solution is providing agents with dedicated, sandboxed environments to run tests and verify functionality before a human sees the code, shifting review from process to outcome.

When an AI coding assistant goes off track, it can be hard to undo the damage. Developer Terry Lynn mitigates this risk by programming his AI workflow to make a Git commit before and after each small phase of a task. This creates a trail of "breadcrumbs," allowing him to easily revert to a stable state if the AI makes a mistake.

Treating AI evaluation like a final exam is a mistake. For critical enterprise systems, evaluations should be embedded at every step of an agent's workflow (e.g., after planning, before action). This is akin to unit testing in classic software development and is essential for building trustworthy, production-ready agents.

When building for AI-powered environments, design tools to be equally usable by humans and the AI model. An elegant, simple design for humans often translates directly into an effective tool for AI agents, simplifying development and promoting shared logic.

Instead of codebases becoming harder to manage over time, use an AI agent to create a "compounding engineering" system. Codify learnings from each feature build—successful plans, bug fixes, tests—back into the agent's prompts and tools, making future development faster and easier.

To improve the quality and accuracy of an AI agent's output, spawn multiple sub-agents with competing or adversarial roles. For example, a code review agent finds bugs, while several "auditor" agents check for false positives, resulting in a more reliable final analysis.

To ensure comprehension of AI-generated code, developer Terry Lynn created a "rubber duck" rule in his AI tool. This prompts the AI to explain code sections and even create pop quizzes about specific functions. This turns the development process into an active learning tool, ensuring he deeply understands the code he's shipping.