> Even if i talk to a senior engineer, i'm trying to be specific as possible to avoid ambiguities etc. Sure - but you're being specific about the acceptance cr

> Even if i talk to a senior engineer, i'm trying to be specific as possible to avoid ambiguities etc. Sure - but you're being specific about the acceptance criteria, not the technical implementation details, right? That's where the models I've been using are at the moment in terms of capability; they're like junior engineers. They know how to write good quality code. If I tell them exactly what to write, they can one-shot most tasks. Otherwise, there's a good chance the output will be spaghetti. > There are so many subtle things/understandings of the architecture that are just in my head or a colleagues head. My primary agentic code generation tool at the moment is OpenHands (app.all-hands.dev). Every time it makes an architectural decision I disagree with, I add a "microagent" (long-term context, analogous to CLAUDE.md or Devin's "Knowledge Base"). If that new microagent works as expected, I incorporate it into either my global or organization-level configs. The result is that it gets more and more aligned with the way I prefer to do things over time.