This absolutely captures my experience.
My successful AI written projects are those where I care solely on the output and have little to no knowledge about the subject matter.
When I try to walk an agent through creating anything about which I have a deeply held opinion of what good looks like, I end up frustrated and abandoning the project.
I've enjoyed using roo code's architect function to document an agreed upon approach, then been delighted and frustrated in equal measure by the implementation of code mode.
On revelation is to always start new tasks and avoid continuing large conversations, because I would typically tackle any problem myself in smaller steps with verifiable outputs, whereas I tend to pose the entire problem space to the agent which it invariably fails at.
I've settled on spending time finding what works for me. Earlier today I took 30 minutes to add functionality to an app that would've taken me days to write. And what's more I only put 30 minutes into the diary for it, because I knew what I wanted and didn't care how it got there.
This leads me to conclude that using AI to write code that a(nother) human is one day to interact with is a no-go, for all the reasons listed.
> "This leads me to conclude that using AI to write code that a(nother) human is one day to interact with is a no-go, for all the reasons listed." So, if one's goal is to develop code that is easily maintainable by others, do you think that AI writing code gets in the way of that goal?