Shivangi Tripathi

Shivangi Tripathi

MonoCloud for StartupsMonoCloud for Startups
Building Saas x ai x auth x infra

Badges

Buddy System
Buddy System
Pixel perfection 💎
Pixel perfection 💎
Bright Idea 💡
Bright Idea 💡
Thought Leader
Thought Leader
View all badges

Maker History

Forums

What parts of a vibe-coded product should never be left to the vibe?

I ve been building more with AI lately, and I ve realised I am comfortable letting it write a lot of the code, but much less comfortable letting it decide the rules the product runs on. If I already know how something should behave, I usually define that first. What inputs are valid, what should happen, what should never happen, edge cases, fallback behaviour. AI can help me build it, but I don t want an important product rule to exist only because the model happened to infer it correctly in that conversation. The line gets blurry pretty quickly though.

I am fine giving AI much more freedom with something like UI implementation. Billing feels very different. So do permissions, data deletion, security checks, or anything where one slightly different interpretation can have an actual consequence. And once you start defining enough rules yourself, I am not even sure where vibe coding ends and AI-assisted development begins.

For people shipping real products this way, what do you still let the AI decide?

And what have you decided should always be deterministic, no matter how good the model gets?

If an AI agent is acting for you, should it get all of your permissions?

A user gives an agent a task. Maybe it needs to read invoices, update a CRM record, check an internal dashboard, or call a few APIs on their behalf. The easy model is to let the agent act with whatever access the user already has.

But I am not sure that makes sense once the user has a lot of authority. If I can delete a workspace, change billing, export customer data, or invite an admin, does an agent helping me with one task need access to all of that too Giving the agent its own identity and narrower permissions sounds safer. But then another question comes up: how narrow can those permissions be before the agent keeps hitting boundaries halfway through the task?

So I am curious how teams building agents are thinking about this today.

Does the agent inherit the user s authority? Does it get its own identity with access only to specific APIs or actions? Or are you handling this another way? And where do you draw the line between the user is allowed to do this and the agent is allowed to do this for the user ?

What are your experiences with Fable 5.1 not for coding?

I used Fable 5.1 for coding whole day and it's definitely the best publicly available model for this purpose. I'm curious what are your experiences related to other use cases.

View more