AI is restructuring engineering teams. A future model involves a small group of senior engineers defining processes and reviewing code, while AI and junior engineers handle production. This raises a critical question: how will junior engineers develop into senior architects in this new paradigm?

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's impact on coding is unfolding in stages. Phase 1 was autocomplete (Copilot). We're now in Phase 2, defined by interactive agents where developers orchestrate tasks with prompts. Phase 3 will be true automation, where agents independently handle complete, albeit simpler, development workflows without direct human guidance.

The most significant productivity gains come from applying AI to every stage of development, including research, planning, product marketing, and status updates. Limiting AI to just code generation misses the larger opportunity to automate the entire engineering process.

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.

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.

Instead of fighting for perfect code upfront, accept that AI assistants can generate verbose code. Build a dedicated "refactoring" phase into your process, using AI with specific rules to clean up and restructure the initial output. This allows you to actively manage technical debt created by AI-powered speed.

Borrowing from classic management theory, the most effective way to use AI agents is to fix problems at the earliest 'lowest value stage'. This means rigorously reviewing the agent's proposed plan *before* it writes any code, preventing costly rework later on.

As AI generates more code, the core engineering task evolves from writing to reviewing. Developers will spend significantly more time evaluating AI-generated code for correctness, style, and reliability, fundamentally changing daily workflows and skill requirements.