AI coding assistants don’t have an intelligence problem. They have a runtime discipline problem. Here is how I’m enforcing it.
Summary
A developer introduces agent-rigor, an open-source framework that enforces runtime discipline and traditional SDLC mechanics into AI coding assistants to prevent common agent failures like scope creep and fix-forward loops.
Similar Articles
Engineering discipline
A developer discusses the challenge of maintaining engineering discipline and architectural integrity when using AI coding agents that generate code faster than it can be comprehended, seeking best practices to avoid creating low-quality software.
AI agents recreate the “rockstar developer” problem, just faster
The post compares AI agents to 'rockstar developers' who create clever but unmaintainable code, pointing out that agents lack memory of their own actions. It recommends using visible conventions like AGENTS.md, ADRs, and tests to keep agent-generated code understandable by the team.
AI coding agents need a “plan first, edit later” workflow? Looking for feedback
A proposed workflow for AI coding agents that emphasizes brainstorming and boundary enforcement before code editing, seeking community feedback on its utility.
Spec-driven agentic coding is quietly making us worse at the job of supervising agents
The author argues that heavily relying on AI coding agents causes human developers to lose critical technical intuition and code review skills over time, proposing measures like mandatory hands-on coding days to maintain supervisory competence.
@pauliusztin_: The future of AI coding is NOT one super-agent. It's agent loops. One agent shouldn't: Plan Code Test Review Monitor CI…
The article argues that AI coding should use specialized agents in loops with bounded retry and human approval, rather than a single super-agent, emphasizing workflow engineering over agent intelligence.