Advin Jadis

I'm a veteran and solo founder with no formal coding background. Spent the last few weeks directing Replit's AI agent (with Claude as a strategic/QA partner) to build a real production app, entirely from my phone.

The part that surprised me: the "vibe" is the easy 20%. The other 80% was the same discipline any build needs catching bugs by hand (missing auto-capitalization, a timezone off-by-one, a file upload limit rejecting real phone photos), refusing to accept "it's fixed" without proof, running full walkthroughs section by section, chasing root causes instead of patching symptoms.

That's made me rethink what "vibe coding" even means. It's not skipping the engineering discipline it's relocating it. Instead of writing code, you're writing precise instructions, reviewing output critically, and doing QA like a hawk. If anything it demands more discipline, not less, because you can't rely on catching mistakes by reading your own code you have to actually test everything.

For others who've directed an AI agent instead of hand-coding: has your experience matched that, or did you find a different bottleneck? What ended up being the hardest part for you the instructing, the reviewing, or something else entirely?

We build church management software for India - a market most Western SaaS completely ignores. Indian churches have completely different workflows, fiscal years, giving methods, and compliance requirements than US churches. Yet every existing tool was built for American congregations.

It got me thinking - how many other niche markets are being underserved because the dominant players only built for one context?

How do you actually use AI for long-term planning?

I've noticed something while building products.

AI is amazing at answering questions, but the moment a project stretches beyond a few conversations, things start to break down.

Every new chat means I have to explain: