Glossary

Agentic coding, and how it differs from autocomplete.

The difference is the feedback loop. An agent can find out it was wrong.

Download for macOS
v0.1.33 · .dmg · Apple Silicon & Intel
Signed & notarized by Apple · opens without a Gatekeeper warning
sha256 698955a0187bc039f4c74f5d05a9f10fbb27376a45788a0a241d1326b73873c7
Download for Windows instead
$curl -fsSL https://lucidtrain.com/install.sh | sh

Agentic coding means a model works toward a goal over multiple turns, deciding what to do next based on what happened last, rather than producing one response to one prompt. The loop is: plan, call a tool, read the result, revise, repeat until done or blocked. The tools are ordinary developer actions such as reading files, searching, running commands and editing. The practical difference from autocomplete is that an agent has a feedback loop, so it can run the tests and react to a failure rather than handing you code it never executed.

Where the difficulty actually lives

It is tempting to think the model is the whole story, but most of what separates a useful agent from a frustrating one is the scaffolding: which tools it has, what it is allowed to do without asking, how results are fed back, how much context is kept and what is dropped. That surrounding machinery is what harness engineering names, and it improves independently of the model.

Vibe coding is a different thing

The two terms get used interchangeably and should not be. Vibe coding describes accepting generated code without closely reading it, which is a stance toward review. Agentic coding describes the mechanism by which the code is produced. You can use an agent and review every diff carefully, and that is neither a contradiction nor unusual.

Why verification is the binding constraint

An agent that can run your test suite can tell whether it succeeded. An agent that cannot is guessing, however good the model. This is why the most valuable thing many teams do before adopting one is make the tests fast and reliable: the agent's ceiling is set by how well it can check its own work.

Autonomy is a dial, not a switch

Serious harnesses offer graded modes: explore and propose but write nothing, propose each edit for approval, accept edits but confirm commands, or run freely. The right setting varies by task and by how well you know the codebase, and treating it as one global preference is how people end up either reviewing trivia or missing something important.

FAQ

Questions

How is agentic coding different from autocomplete?

Autocomplete predicts the next tokens in your editor. An agent works toward a goal across many turns, running tools and reacting to their output, so it can discover that its first attempt failed.

Is agentic coding the same as vibe coding?

No. Vibe coding is about not closely reviewing generated code. Agentic coding is about how the code is produced. Using an agent and reviewing every diff is entirely normal.

What limits how well an agent performs?

Usually verification. An agent that can run tests and read the failures can correct itself; one that cannot is guessing regardless of the model underneath.

Related

Last updated