Short answer
When AI writes most of the code, responsibility for quality moves from review to automated gates. Strict type checking, tests, lint rules that encode architectural decisions, and a single verify command that must be green before every commit together catch what a human stops noticing after the third file.
The objection to AI-written code is rarely that it does not work. It is that it drifts — style, structure and decisions pulling apart over months until nobody can say why anything looks the way it does.
Review does not scale
A human reviewing their third AI-generated file within an hour is no longer reading with the same sharpness. That is not a character flaw, it is a predictable effect. The fix is to move as much judgement as possible to something that does not tire.
The gates that do the work
- Strict type checking, including noUncheckedIndexedAccess
- Lint rules that encode architectural decisions
- Tests for the things that cost money when they break
- One command that runs everything, required green before commit
The point of that last item is that a gate nobody runs is not a gate. If it takes four commands and a good memory, it will be skipped on a Friday.
Common questions
- Does code get worse if AI writes it?
- Quality follows the gates. With type checking, tests and lint rules in place, the code holds the same level regardless of who or what wrote it.
Websites, products and brands — built in weeks
Torn Studio builds digital products with AI tooling. You get the same quality in a third of the time, and you always talk directly to the person building it.