I Let Claude Code Write a Feature Branch. Here's What It Got Right and Wrong.
I tried full vibe coding mode on a settings screen for my SaaS. The AI followed my architecture where it was clean - and drifted where it wasn't. Turns out that says more about my code than about the AI.
I needed a settings screen for my project. Profile info, notification preferences, a couple of toggles, a save button. The kind of screen that’s important but not exactly the reason you got into software engineering.
I’ve been working with AI tools since the first ChatGPT dropped. I know how to get good results… Small tasks, precise instructions, clear context. But this time I wanted to try the opposite. Full vibe coding mode. One big prompt, sit back, see what comes out.
Here’s what happened.
It followed my architecture. Mostly.
This surprised me. I expected chaos. Instead, it picked up on my project structure, matched my component patterns, and produced a settings screen that looked like it belonged in my app.
The parts where my architecture is clean and conventional? The AI followed them without being told. It saw the pattern and continued it.
Then it drifted.
Not everywhere. Just in the spots where my code gets… creative. The places where I’d solved a problem in a way that made perfect sense to me at 11pm on a Tuesday but wouldn’t survive a code review from someone who’s never seen the project.
In those spots, the AI didn’t write bad code. It wrote different code. It defaulted to the more conventional approach. The one you’d find in a tutorial, because my approach was too niche for it to pick up on.
And here’s the part I didn’t expect: I started wondering if the AI was wrong, or if I was.
The mirror
When Claude Code follows your patterns, it means your architecture is readable. Readable to any fresh set of eyes, including an AI that’s never seen your repo before. When it drifts, it’s telling you something. Maybe your abstraction is too clever. Maybe your naming doesn’t communicate what you think it does. Maybe that custom hook should’ve been a more standard pattern all along.
Think of it as a new team member on day one. The places where it gets confused might be the same places where your next hire or colleague will get confused too.
Where I landed
I kept most of what Claude wrote. The parts I rewrote were all in places where my codebase wasn’t clear enough for anyone but me to follow.
Vibe coding isn’t great for production work. But as an architecture review? Accidentally one of the most useful things I’ve done this month.