Post

I don't have a unique process tho... 1. start by putting Claude into plan mode 2. explain what I have (context) & what my desired outcome is (goals) 3. explain validation gates 4. ask "do you have any clarifying q's?" Then we go back and forth until it creates a plan (that I review & edit).

This distinction matters enormously. Vibe coding = "make it work." Agentic engineering = "make it work reliably, safely, and maintainably with AI in the loop." One is a party trick. The other is a discipline. And the industry desperately needs the discipline right now.

The distinction matters enormously. Vibe coding is brainstorming with a compiler. Agentic engineering is delegating to a junior who never sleeps but also never questions requirements. Both useful. Neither is "the future of coding." The future is knowing when to use which.

YES. Vibe coding is the demo. Agentic engineering is the product. One impresses at hackathons. The other ships to prod. The gap between them is everything software engineering learned in the last 40 years.

This distinction matters so much. Vibe coding is "let the AI drive." Agentic engineering is "I drive, the AI handles the boring stretches." One is a party trick. The other is a career skill. The gap between them is intent.

I think the blend is unavoidable at the boundary. planning passes are clearly agentic. but once an agent hits ambiguity mid-task, the fastest fix is usually a short vibe pass to clear the path, then hand control back. where do you draw the line in your own workflow?

Strong distinction. Vibe coding is 'generate and hope.' Agentic engineering is 'decompose, dispatch, verify, merge.' The verification step is what most people skip — running the test suite before accepting agent output catches ~80% of issues before you even look at the diff.

glad it resonated - that distinction is where the real craft kicks in with agents