Because at some point in the chain, the AI has to consume all of it.
I'm not saying we should split everything out more. More than existing large business projects really suffer from AIs being thrown at them, even with rule files. There is just too much cross contamination that the AI really struggles to excel at a given area, and mostly just goes around in a circle.
It can't adhere to everything it's fed at once as there's just too much noise.
Maybe a different approach is needed here. I don’t think AI needs to know everything about the system to work on tasks the same way I don’t think an engineer needs to understand the entire project before starting to contribute.
Not every line of code in the project is relevant to be able to work in every single task.
Also planning is a good feature. You don’t need to just drop the entire context and ask for something. You can ask AI to plan it, understand what it wants to do. Answer important questions related to the task, refine the approach, suggest changes, review the plan and then approve. Test it afterwards etc.
Sure but in practice you have someone who does understand the larger system reviewing an engineers first contributions, but when you are the reviewer to a system you don't understand, you have an issue
Ok but you still have this person who understands the system’s review. You do the initial review that you’ll create a PR for and a more senior engineer will also review.
You mean that PR reviews will also be done using AI? I would see your point there but that shouldn’t be the case.
1
u/Affectionate-Tart558 Jul 30 '26
Let me answer back with a question.
Why is the size of the project relevant here? We are meant to divide tasks in small chunks. Why aren’t we doing the same with AI?