Stop Babysitting Your AI Agent

You discovered Claude Code. Maybe Cursor. Maybe Copilot on steroids. And for a glorious moment, you felt like a 10x developer.

Then reality hit.

You’re sitting there, watching your terminal, waiting for Claude to finish a task. You can’t walk away because last time you did, it refactored your entire authentication system “for consistency.” You can’t work on something else because context switching kills your flow. You’re not coding anymore. You’re supervising.

This isn’t the future we were promised.

The vibe coder’s dilemma

The vibe was supposed to be: describe what you want, let AI build it, ship faster than ever. Instead, you’re a helicopter parent for a very expensive robot.

Sound familiar?

Here’s the dirty secret of AI-assisted coding: the tools are incredible, but the workflow is broken.

AI coding assistants out of the box are like hiring a genius intern who:

• Works one task at a time (even when they could parallelize)
• Never runs tests unless you remind them
• Occasionally “improves” files you didn’t ask about
• Has no idea what they did yesterday

You can configure them better. There’s project files, hooks, custom commands. The optimization rabbit hole goes deep.

But you’re a vibe coder. You want to build, not configure. Every hour spent on setup is an hour not shipping.

So you don’t configure. And your AI runs at maybe 30% of its potential.

The supervision trap

Let me paint a picture of a typical morning:

6:00 AM - Wake up, want to add a feature

6:15 AM - Open laptop, start your AI assistant

6:20 AM - AI working, you’re watching

6:45 AM - AI finished, but tests don’t pass

7:00 AM - Fixing the AI’s mistakes

7:30 AM - Finally working, commit and push

7:35 AM - Kids wake up, laptop closes

7:36 AM - “I’ll do more tonight” (you won’t)

Ninety minutes. One feature. Half of it spent supervising or fixing.

This doesn’t scale. Not for solo founders. Not for indie hackers. Not for anyone trying to ship fast.

The relationship needs to change

Here’s what I believe: the future of software development isn’t writing code. It’s directing AI that writes code.

But we’re in the awkward teenage phase. The AI is capable, but the tooling assumes you’re sitting there watching. That creates a ceiling on what one person can accomplish.

The relationship needs to evolve:

From	To
Supervising	Directing
Watching	Monitoring
Fixing	Reviewing
Typing	Approving

You become the CEO of your AI workforce. Set objectives. Review results. Ship products.

What “directing” actually looks like

Imagine a different morning:

6:00 AM - Wake up, grab phone

6:02 AM - Set today’s task from your phone

6:03 AM - Configure safety limits, let it run

6:04 AM - Put phone down, make coffee

6:30 AM - Check progress: feature done, tests passing

6:31 AM - Review changes, approve the merge

6:35 AM - Kids wake up

6:36 AM - Feature shipped. On to the next.

Same hour. Ten times more done. Zero supervision.

The difference isn’t the AI - it’s the workflow around the AI.

The missing pieces

To get from supervising to directing, you need:

Visibility without presence - See what your AI is doing without sitting in front of it. Know when it’s stuck, when it’s finished, when it needs input.

Guardrails without babysitting - Set boundaries once. The AI stays within them. You don’t need to watch.

Configuration without complexity - Best practices applied automatically. No documentation rabbit holes.

Control without context switching - Adjust, pause, or redirect from wherever you are. Your flow stays intact.

These aren’t revolutionary concepts. They’re the basics of any good management system. We just haven’t applied them to AI agents yet.

Who this matters for

Not everyone needs this. If you’re on a team with code review processes and sprint planning, you have different constraints.

But if you’re:

• A solo founder building multiple products
• An indie hacker shipping fast
• A developer who’d rather describe features than write boilerplate
• Anyone who’s said “I wish I could just tell the AI what to do and walk away”

Then the supervision trap is your bottleneck. And breaking out of it is how you scale.

The risks are real

Let’s be honest: running AI agents with less supervision isn’t risk-free.

Things that can go wrong:

• Token budgets burn faster than expected
• The AI loops on a problem instead of asking for help
• Broken code gets committed
• Scope creeps beyond what you asked for

The answer isn’t more supervision. It’s better guardrails. Automatic limits. Safety nets that catch problems before they compound.

The goal is confident autonomy, not reckless automation.

The bigger picture

We’re at an inflection point. AI coding tools are good enough to do real work. But the workflow - the human-AI interface - is still in version 0.1.

The developers who figure out how to direct AI rather than supervise it will ship more, stress less, and build things that weren’t possible before.

That’s not hype. It’s just math. If you can do in 30 minutes what used to take 2 hours, you can attempt things you wouldn’t have tried.

More attempts. More shots on goal. More shipped products.

The vibe we’re going for

Here’s the vision:

You wake up with an idea. You describe it in plain language. You set it running. You live your life. You come back to working code.

Not every day. Not every task. But enough that your relationship with coding fundamentally changes.

You’re not a typist. You’re not a supervisor. You’re a director.

That’s the vibe.

---

Built by a solo founder for solo founders. Because we’ve got products to ship and lives to live.