> I find LLM generated code ends up pushing review/maintenance burden onto others. It "looks" right at first glance, and passes superficial tests, so it's easy

> I find LLM generated code ends up pushing review/maintenance burden onto others. It "looks" right at first glance, and passes superficial tests, so it's easy to get merged. But then as you build on top of it, you realize the foundations are hastily put together, so a lot of it needs to be rewritten. This describes most projects I've been on where there wasn't a thorough RFC process? Where I'm seeing the sweet spot right now: 1. Have a detailed RFC 2. Ticket out the work 3. Feed the RFC and ticket to the LLM via MCP 4. Have your refactoring and design patterns textbooks close at hand so you can steer the LLM properly when things start to get messy. "DRY this out" or "implement this using X pattern" tend to be highly effective prompts 5. Use agents or other LLMs to review code for RFC compliance, test coverage, etc. (this isn't as effective as I'd like it to be right now, skill issue probably) 6. When there are bugs, force the LLM to do TDD - say "We're observing a bug in production, here are the reproduction steps, write a failing test that covers this code path." Obviously check that the test is a real test and not slop. Then, prompt the LLM to fix the isue.