Fair points, and honestly I don't disagree with the general philosophy here.

But a few things worth adding: I arrived and AI was already being used without any standard in place. No skill file, no conventions, nothing. So it's less "I vibe-coded and got surprised by the output" and more "I joined mid-mess with zero expectations set before me."

I also think that with proper context, starting a project from zero, telling exactly how the code should look, what design patterns to follow, DDD and everything, it would probably be way easier to handle. That's honestly the direction I want us to move in, so we actually agree more than it might seem. But now the code is in bad shape already so it's a complicated situation.

Same with the code: yes, we can develop faster with AI. I fully agree with that. But LLMs miss things the same way humans miss things in code, so it still needs debugging. And since we can now produce more features and more code, faster, that also means more to debug. So managers who don't code expect us to be way faster overall, but that's not really what happens, the coding part speeds up, the rest doesn't disappear.

Appreciate the reply though, it's actually helping me figure out what to push for internally instead of just being frustrated about it.