Agentic Coding Explained: How It Differs From Vibe Coding

Agentic coding means giving an AI agent a defined goal and letting it read your code, edit files, run commands and check its own work, while you review the result. Vibe coding means prompting and judging the app by using it, without reading the code. The same tool can do either. What differs is how much you plan up front and how much you verify afterward.

What agentic coding actually is

A chat assistant takes text in and gives text back. An agent has tools. Anthropic's docs describe Claude Code's agentic loop as three phases: gather context, take action, verify results. The loop repeats until the task is done. Tools are what make it agentic: the agent can read your code, edit files and run commands, not just suggest changes.

You stay in that loop too. You can interrupt it, add context or redirect it at any point.

Cursor's agent mode, Windsurf's Cascade, Replit Agent and Codex all work on this same idea, with different interfaces. If you want to see one up close, our Claude Code tutorial walks through a first project.

Where vibe coding fits

Andrej Karpathy coined "vibe coding" in February 2025 for casual, low-scrutiny AI programming, according to this timeline. If you're new to the term, our practical definition of vibe coding covers the basics.

At Sequoia's AI Ascent in 2026, Karpathy said vibe coding raises the floor, so anyone can build software. He said agentic engineering is about preserving the quality bar of professional software. He calls it an engineering discipline. "Agentic coding" is the everyday name for the same idea: you work with agents, but you stay accountable for the result.

The real difference: what you verify

People often define the two by autonomy. A more useful split is what a person checks. One write-up puts it this way: in agentic coding you direct the agent through a planned task, read its changes and run checks. In vibe coding you judge by using the app. It also notes that someone who accepts an agent's code unread is vibe coding with an agentic tool.

So an agent doesn't make a process agentic. A fast agent with no plan and no checks is just vibe coding with a longer reach.

The tools column is a rough pattern, not a rule. Most of these tools can be used either way.

When to use which

Use vibe coding when being wrong costs you an afternoon. Think landing page mockups, a script only you use, or an idea you're testing before committing. Speed matters more than structure there.

Switch to agentic coding when someone else depends on the code, or when you'll need to change it in a month. Auth, payments, anything touching user data. A rule of thumb: the moment you'd be embarrassed to say "I don't know how that works," start reviewing.

Many projects use both. A common pattern is to vibe code the first screen to see if the idea holds up. Then you hand the real build to an agent with a plan and checks.

How to work agentically in five steps

1. Write a definition of done. State what the feature must do and how you'll know it worked, in plain language. This is the main skill. Example: "A user can reset their password by email. The link works once. Existing login still works."
2. Ask for a plan first. Have the agent read the relevant files and propose steps before it edits anything. Fix the plan, not the code.
3. Keep the task small. One feature or one bug per run. Big vague tasks produce big vague diffs.
4. Make the agent run checks. Tests, the build, the linter. If you have none, ask it to add a couple for the new behavior. Our routine for testing AI-written code is a decent starting point.
5. Review the diff, then commit. Read what changed, not just whether the app loads. Commit each working step so a bad run is cheap to undo. If git still feels fuzzy, start with Git for beginners, AI edition.

A prompt you can paste

This works in most agent tools. Change the task and the done criteria.

Task: add a password reset flow by email.

Done means:
- A user can request a reset link and set a new password.
- The link works once and expires.
- Existing login still works.
- Tests cover the new behavior and pass.

Process:
1. Read the relevant files. Give me a plan in 5 bullets or fewer.
2. Stop and wait for my OK before editing anything.
3. Work in small steps. After each step, run the tests and the build.
4. If something fails, fix it and re-run. Stop after 3 failed attempts and tell me what's stuck.
5. Don't touch files outside this feature.
6. When done, summarize the diff and anything you're unsure about.

The "stop after 3 attempts" line matters. Without a stop rule, agents can loop on a bad idea and burn through your usage allowance.

Common ways this goes wrong

• Approving the plan without reading it. That's vibe coding with extra steps.
• No tests, so "verify" means nothing. The agent can only check what's checkable. A claim of "it works" is not proof.
• Letting it touch everything. Scope the task and say which files are off limits.
• Skipping security review. Agents write confident code, including confident mistakes.

Is it worth the extra effort?

You spend more time before and after the agent runs, but less time debugging code nobody read. That's the trade, and it pays off most on the parts of an app that can hurt you. For a throwaway prototype, it may not be worth it. Be honest about which one you're building.

You can read the original framing in the Sapkota, Roumeliotis and Karkee review paper. It describes agentic coding as outcome-oriented and self-directed, against vibe coding's focus on flow. In practice, the line is blurrier than the paper suggests. What you read and test decides which side you're on.

FAQ

Is agentic coding the same as agentic engineering?

Mostly. "Agentic engineering" is Karpathy's name for the more disciplined version, where you coordinate agents and stay accountable for the spec, quality and security. "Agentic coding" is the broader, everyday term for working with coding agents. If you review plans and diffs, you're doing the engineering version.

Can I vibe code with Claude Code or Cursor?

Yes. Both are agentic tools, and you can use them to prompt, accept and move on without reading anything. That's vibe coding with an agentic tool. The process is what makes it agentic, not the product.

Do I need to know how to code to do agentic coding?

Not to start, but you need to be able to say what "done" looks like and to read a summary of what changed. Ask the agent to explain the diff in plain English, and ask it to add tests. You'll pick up enough to catch the obvious problems.

Cover photo: Zan Lazarevic on Unsplash