Agentic Engineering

I do not think AI replaces engineers. It supercharges them, and in doing so it moves the bottleneck. When code generation gets cheap, more code gets written, not less, and the expensive part becomes reviewing, verifying, and integrating it. That is the through-line in everything I write here: the work does not disappear, it relocates.

Once you accept that, the org chart starts to move. Engineers become managers of agents, the leverage shifts up a level, and the questions that matter are about specs, documentation, and evaluation rather than keystrokes. The teams that win are the ones that measure the right thing instead of optimizing token counts, and that build stability around whatever model is current rather than betting the product on a single one.

And almost all of it is a product engineering problem, not a research one. The hard parts are latency as a feature decision, knowing your user is not you, and resisting the urge to ship another chat box. The posts below are the running log of working through that in production.

Reading path (25 posts)

Frequently Asked Questions

Does AI replace software engineers?

No. In Jeff Adler's view AI supercharges engineers and shifts the bottleneck from writing code to reviewing and verifying it, so more code gets written, not fewer engineers needed.

What is agentic engineering?

Building software where AI agents do much of the code generation under human direction, which changes the engineer's job toward specification, review, evaluation, and orchestration.

More topics: Engineering Leadership | iOS Architecture at Scale | All posts | About Jeff Adler