| I don't know what other people are doing, I mostly use LLMs: * Scaffolding * Ask it what's wrong with the code * Ask it for improvements I could make * Ask it what the code does (amazing for old code you've never seen) * Ask it to provide architect level insights into best practices One area where they all seem to fail is lesser known packages they tend to either reference old functionality that is not there anymore, or never was, they hallucinate. Which is part of why I don't ask it for too much. Junie did impress me, but it was very slow, so I would love to see a version of Junie using this version of Grok, it might be worthwhile. |
That's phase 1, ask it to "think deeply" (Claude keyword, only works with the anthropic models) while doing that. Then ask it to make a detailed plan of solving the issue and write that into current-fix.md and ask it to add clearly testable criteria when the issuen is solved.
Now you manually check the criteria wherever they sound plausible, if not - it's analysis failed and its output was worthless.
But if it sounds good, you can then start a new session and ask it to read the-markdown-file and implement the change.
Now you can plausibility check the diff and are likely done
But as the sister comment pointed out, agentic coding really breaks apart with large files like you usually have in brownfield projects.