โ† All posts

Posted on LinkedIn ยท Jun 30, 2026

Built with AI is not maintained with AI

How I run coding agents in parallel without shipping demos that fall over. Spec first, one concern per change, and a human who reads the diff.

Aditya JoshiForward Deployed Founding Engineer ยท

Anyone can vibe-code a demo now. Shipping a product that survives real users is a completely different sport. โšก "I built this with AI" and "I can maintain this with AI" are two very different sentences. Most people can't tell them apart yet. They're about to. โœจ Vibe coding: prompt, accept, prompt, accept, ship the moment it looks like it works. Feels like magic. Dies the second a real user touches it. ๐Ÿ› ๏ธ Engineering with AI looks slower and is actually faster: โ†’ Spec before code. I write what I want before Claude writes a line. โ†’ One concern per change, even when it could do ten at once. โ†’ Not done until I've watched it run. Green tests aren't proof. โ†’ Every decision logged, so the same mistake doesn't get a second shot. Same model. Same prompt window. Opposite outcome. The difference was never the AI. It's whether there's an engineer on the other end who knows what "correct" actually looks like. I run 8โ€“16 Claude Code instances in parallel worktrees, merge queues, the whole rig. None of it ships clean without a spec and a human who can read the diff. "I built this with AI" is cheap now. "I can maintain this with AI" is the moat. ๐Ÿ”’ Curious who's already feeling the gap between the two. ๐Ÿ™‚โ€โ†”๏ธ

Open on LinkedIn โ†—
Who decides who won
โ† Previous ยท X
Seatbelts before the car
Next ยท X โ†’

โ† Back to the overview