AI tools have become part of everyday development faster than most of us expected. For many developers, AI now sits somewhere between an autocomplete engine and a junior assistant that never gets tired.
But after using AI consistently in real projects, one thing becomes clear:
AI is extremely good at some coding tasks and surprisingly bad at others.
Understanding that boundary matters more than choosing the “best” model.
Where AI is genuinely good at coding
Let’s start with what AI does well, because ignoring this would be dishonest.
1. Explaining unfamiliar code
AI shines when you paste in a function, a config file, or a block of legacy code and ask:
“What is this doing?”
It’s especially useful when:
- You’re onboarding to a new codebase
- You’re reading open-source projects
- You’re revisiting your own old code
This doesn’t replace reading code carefully, but it dramatically reduces the initial friction.
2. Boilerplate and repetitive code
AI is very effective at generating:
- Basic CRUD operations
- Simple API handlers
- Repetitive UI components
- Config templates
This is where AI feels like a productivity boost rather than a risk. You already know what you want AI just saves typing time.
3. Error explanation, not error fixing
One underrated strength: explaining error messages.
Instead of blindly copying fixes, AI helps when you ask:
- What does this error mean?
- Why is this happening?
- What are common causes?
This improves understanding instead of hiding problems.
4. Writing tests (with supervision)
AI can be helpful for:
- Generating basic unit test structures
- Covering obvious edge cases
- Creating test data
Used carefully, this saves time without risking production logic.
Where AI fails badly
Now for the uncomfortable part.
1. Architecture decisions
AI is terrible at:
- System design tradeoffs
- Long-term architecture choices
- Understanding organizational constraints
It doesn’t know:
- Your team’s skill level
- Your future roadmap
- Your operational realities
Following AI blindly here creates fragile systems.
2. Context-heavy business logic
AI struggles when logic depends on:
- Domain knowledge
- Implicit business rules
- Historical decisions
It can generate code that looks correct but subtly violates real requirements.
This is one of the most dangerous failure modes code that passes review but fails reality.
3. Confidently wrong answers
AI often fails confidently.
Instead of saying “I don’t know,” it may:
- Invent APIs
- Assume outdated syntax
- Mix incompatible versions
This is why copying code without verification is risky.
4. Performance and scalability decisions
AI can suggest code that works but not code that scales.
It rarely considers:
- Performance bottlenecks
- Memory implications
- Production traffic patterns
Those decisions still require human judgment and experience.
Real-world projects expose AI’s limits quickly
In practical work, especially on real products, AI’s limitations become obvious fast.
When building or maintaining something user-facing whether it’s an API, a dashboard, or an ecommerce platform like Shopperdot.com correctness, maintainability, and clarity matter far more than speed.
AI can help you move faster early on.
It cannot tell you when you’re moving in the wrong direction.
The biggest mistake developers make with AI
The biggest mistake isn’t using AI.
It’s delegating thinking.
AI works best when:
- You already understand the problem
- You review and adapt the output
- You treat it as a tool, not an authority
AI fails when it becomes the decision-maker.
A better mental model for AI in coding
Stop thinking of AI as:
- A senior engineer
- A replacement
- A source of truth
Think of it as:
- A fast assistant
- A second brain for syntax
- A way to reduce friction, not responsibility
In real systems including production environments behind platforms like Shopperdot.com accountability never transfers to the tool. It stays with the developer.
Final thoughts
AI is good at:
- Reducing friction
- Explaining code
- Handling repetitive tasks
AI fails at:
- Understanding context
- Making architectural decisions
- Owning consequences
Used correctly, it makes developers more productive.
Used blindly, it makes systems fragile.
The future of development isn’t AI replacing developers.
It’s developers who know when not to trust AI outperforming those who do.
Top comments (0)