"It wouldn't be invalid" isn't the worst double negative in the world but it would be valid to say that it was unpleasant to read it when you could have used a less misdirecting choice of prose that wouldn't have had such a negative effect on my reading comprehension. That is to say that I could have enjoyed it less but I certainly didnt enjoy it as much as i could have if you hadn't used the double negative when a single positive wasn't any further from reach.
Gotcha...I've always struggled to pick up the vocabulary around technical concepts - I guess ive just never prioritised it, and now this whole new field has materialised with a whole new vocabulary to go along with it! I get the tech. The words are my achilles heel.
Okay so now I think you're describing the behaviour I take for granted with the harness i.e. Claude Code.
Having good repo readiness through a good agents/claude.md file + tests + docs means the LLM is able to read more files into its context.
It never occurred to me that anyone would prompt in isolation of their repos but I guess thats exactly what it was like for me last year when I was just feeding ChatGPT prompts away from the repo.
Honestly im proud of the problems I'm able to solve today now that I can use AI to do it so quickly.
Even when I stop and manually check all the work the AI has done, it's still much faster and I'm having to rely on my knowledge and experience to do so. When I'm vibe coding I'm relying on that same knowledge and experience to architect the solution rather than deliver it.
Ive seen the other side- the colleagues who all of a sudden think theyre engineers and are unknowingly exposing critical commercial data to our competitors. That side is scary...and gives me hope that my role while changing, is far from dead.
Also I have hobbies - i only work to pay for them. If "the man" wants to pay me to spend tokens...fine by me. I'll be here to clean it up if it all goes wrong.
Ok so i think i do all of these things and would just describe them as "other ways to prompt and LLM" - i think the nuance youre shooting for here is that using these methods you are "pre-preparing" the prompt - not thinking about it at prompt-time and thus likely to miss stuff.
e.g. Feeding a TODO is just the same as copy-pasting that todo in as a prompt.
I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but here goes.
I have vibe coded a system at work that has enabled me to deliver value in a fraction of the time I expected. My verification steps have been around whether it does the things I told it I wanted it to do. I'm not maintaining the syntax and I'm not expecting anyone else to. Ever.
That said, our teams that deliver products that touch customer data or financial records....they shouldnt (and dont) engineer this way. The tech isnt there (yet).
They just swallow it hole. Teeth were just slowing them down all along.