• Ravn
  • Posts
  • Vibe Coding: The Good, the Bad, and the Buggy

Vibe Coding: The Good, the Bad, and the Buggy

How our lead software architect built a working MVP in 24 hours using only AI prompts—what worked, what broke, and how close to production-worthy it was.

TLDR: Vibe Coding is getting real buzz—and Ravn’s Head of Technology, Donovan Hiland, put it to the test. Using only AI prompts, he built a working internal MVP in 24 hours. While there’s serious prototyping potential, the experiment surfaced key limitations that make one thing clear about the current state: AI is here to augment, not replace, thoughtful engineering.

Note: Curious about what it looked like in action? You can catch the full webinar recording here.

Greetings Builders!

We’ve all seen the hot takes on X and blog posts hyping up “Vibe Coding”—the promise of using AI prompts to code full apps with little to no manual input. The internet would have you believe the future is already here.

But at Ravn, we wanted to find out: is it actually ready for prime time?

So Donovan Hiland, our Head of Technology (and code whisperer-in-chief), set out on an experiment: build a fully functioning internal tool using only AI prompts in Cursor, with Claude and Gemini models doing the heavy lifting. No manual code writing—just vibes.

The Setup
- Tools: Cursor Pro, Claude 3.5/3.7, Gemini 2.5
- Project: Ravn’s internal mentorship + team management app
- Features: Team creation, member syncing, stack/mentor assignments, feedback loops - Method: High-level prompting, minimal context, “Yolo Mode” terminal access

The Process 
- Total time: ~24 active hours across 2 weeks
- Major bottleneck: debugging and refining generated code
- Starting from scratch = failure; pivoting to a template (Next.js, Drizzle, Shadcn/ui) was key

The Good
- Rapid prototyping and boilerplate reduction
- Great for transforming data, generating tests, and filling in the blanks
- Got an MVP up and running faster than traditional methods

The Bad (and Buggy) 
- Subtle bugs that slipped through
- AI struggled with existing code context and nuanced edge cases
- Debugging AI code? Still a very human task
- Think: “baby at a construction site” energy—not safe without supervision

So... What Did We Learn?
AI isn’t ready to replace experienced developers. But it can boost productivity for those who know how to wield it. Like a junior dev that types at warp speed but needs strong guidance, Vibe Coding is best used to accelerate—not define—your engineering standards.

What’s Next?
At Ravn, we’re continuing to integrate AI into our workflows, but thoughtfully and responsibly. We’re investing in playbooks, repeatable patterns, and human-in-the-loop practices to get the most out of AI without compromising quality.

If you’re experimenting with AI development—or want help building responsibly with it—we’re all ears.

Let’s build something real,
The Ravn Team