The Handler's Mindset: Moving from AI User to AI Leader
Introduction
I’ve come to realize that working with an AI code assistant is like working with a world-class bloodhound.
Handled correctly, it’s an incredible partner. It can follow a scent through dense wilderness, covering ground at a speed you could never match. But you can’t just unleash it and hope for the best. Without a skilled handler providing direction, that same world-class nose might get distracted by a squirrel, a discarded sandwich, or a scent trail that leads to the wrong destination entirely. The handler’s job is to balance between letting the hound do its work and ensuring it stays on the mission.
In development, we are the handlers. And right now, too many of us are letting our AI bloodhounds chase squirrels. We’re becoming so mesmerized by the speed that we’re forgetting to check the destination, leading to a new, subtle form of technical debt: The Complacency Debt.
The Problem: The Rise of the Complacent Developer
Before AI (or ‘BAI’, as I like to call it), a ‘Looks Good To Me’ on a pull request meant a developer had applied their critical judgment (for the most part). But the landscape has shifted. Now, AI empowers anyone to generate code that looks impressive on the surface, while they fail to grasp the broader context or the ‘why’ behind the code..
Let me give you an example:
I wanted to show another a friend of mine that the junior developer will use what ever is the most convenient and easy without understanding the aspects of the code that was written, so I’ve tasked a junior developer with the following task: Create a hover effect for a button. Back than we were using MUI (Material UI) with our component. Later the developer showed me his work:
import Button from '@mui/material/Button';
/**
* A demonstration of a Material-UI Button with custom hover effects using the `sx` prop.
*/
function HoverButton() {
return (
<Button
variant="contained"
sx={{
// Base styles for the button
backgroundColor: 'primary.main',
color: 'white',
padding: '12px 24px',
borderRadius: '8px',
fontWeight: 'bold',
fontSize: '1rem',
textTransform: 'none', // Prevent uppercase transformation
transition: 'all 0.3s ease-in-out', // Smooth transition for all properties
boxShadow: '0 4px 6px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.1)',
// Hover styles
'&:hover': {
backgroundColor: '#1565c0', // A slightly darker shade on hover
transform: 'translateY(-2px)', // Lifts the button up slightly
boxShadow: '0 6px 12px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.15)', // Increase shadow for a "lifted" effect
},
// Active (on-click) styles
'&:active': {
transform: 'translateY(0)',
boxShadow: '0 4px 6px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.1)',
},
}}
>
Hover Over Me
</Button>
);
}I told him looks good (while looking at the code knowing that simple HTML and CSS could have been enough and way shorter) and then asked him the simplest of questions:
- What is the variant=“contained”?
- What does sx represents?
- What does rem means?
- The task was referring to just hover why did you do active?
After he fumbled through the questions, the real issue became clear. He had completed the task, but he hadn’t gained any understanding. He simply outsourced his thinking. That’s the Complacency Debt in action: the feature gets shipped, but the developer’s growth is mortgaged, and the project’s codebase pays the interest in fragility.
The Mindset Shift: From User to Senior Reviewer
The solution isn’t to abandon our powerful AI tools. It’s to change the relationship we have with them. We must shift our mindset from being a passive user of a tool to being an active leader of a partner. I treat every interaction with a coding AI the same way a senior engineer should treat a code review with a talented but junior peer: with respect for the output, but with an unwavering critical eye.
The most important feeling that a developer should feel to it’s code is a sense of responsibility, without it a developer (even without AI) might write and copy bad or just flat out wrong/dangrous code. When working with AI while having this sense of resposibility to your code, even if you’ve decided to only vibe code, the code that will be pushed be orders of manitude better then the code that was skimmed and LGMTed.
Three Rules for Handling Your AI Bloodhound
Here are three practical strategies I use every day to lead my AI and ensure we’re both focused on the mission.
Rule #1: Write the Constitution Before You Unleash the Hound
This is similar to the Claude rules but aren’t limited to just Claude. This file is a HUGE (5000 - 15000 token) that is just README.md file for the AI to eat. It also work well with other developers for when you want some uniformity of what the AI does across AI.
The file should be explicit about certain files from logger.ts (in my case) to more logical file sql.ts.
It should contain how to do certain tasks that can very between developers for example:
## How to use SVG
Because that astro had released a new version 5.7 they added support for the following
```astro
---
import Logo from './path/to/svg/file.svg';
---
<Logo width={64} height={64} fill="currentColor" />
```It needs to understand file/project structure like:
### Component Folder Structure:
- Standalone, reusable components (e.g., `Button.astro`, `Logo.astro`) reside directly in `src/components`.
- Components that logically group together multiple sub-components (e.g., a `Select` with `SelectItem`) should be placed in a folder named after the main component (e.g., `src/components/Select/`). The main component file is `index.astro`, and sub-components (like `SelectItem.astro`) are placed within the same folder.
- If a 'simple' component is used by multiple complex components within the _same_ parent group, place it directly within that parent group's folder.
```text
// Example Structure
src/components/
|-> Button.astro // Standalone simple component
|-> Logo.astro // Standalone simple component
|-> Select/ // Complex component group
| |-> index.astro // Main complex component (<select> wrapper)
| |-> SelectItem.astro // Simple sub-component (<option>)
|-> UserProfile/ // Complex component group
| |-> index.astro // Main complex component
| |-> Avatar.astro // Simple sub-component used only here
| |-> StatusIndicator.astro // Simple component used by multiple components in this group
```And do much more! I’ve written my astro rules if you want to go and grab inspiration.
Rule #2: Inspect the Scent Trail, Not Just the Destination
My review process always comes back to a core question: ‘Who is in charge right now?’ To answer that, I run the AI’s output through a simple mental checklist
- Does it align with the project’s “constitution”?
- Is it efficient? Or is it a brute-force solution?
- Is it secure? Did it introduce any potential vulnerabilities?
- Is it readable and maintainable? Or is it overly clever?
Rule #3: Know When to Put the Hound on a Leash
A good handler knows what their bloodhound is good at—and what it’s terrible at. Wasting time trying to force an AI to do something it’s not designed for is the ultimate squirrel chase. For example, I’ve found that current AI models are notoriously bad at translating a detailed Figma design into a clean, semantic HTML DOM structure. The time it takes to write a complex prompt and then fix the output is far greater than just writing the clean HTML myself. Knowing when to say, ‘Thanks, but I’ll take it from here,’ is a critical skill for an effective AI handler.
The Takeaway: Be More Critical Than Your Tools
Ultimately, our role as developers is evolving. The Industrial Revolution automated the jobs of manual laborers; the AI revolution is automating the tasks of cognitive laborers. In this new world, our greatest value doesn’t come from writing boilerplate code or remembering obscure API syntax. That’s the hound’s job now.
Our true value comes from our ability to direct, critique, and lead. It comes from our taste, our experience, and our critical judgment. The future of software development belongs to the handlers—the developers who learn to be more critical than the people and the AI they lead.
Don’t just use the tools. Lead them.