Disclosure: RunAICode.ai may earn a commission when you purchase through links on this page. This doesn’t affect our reviews or rankings. We only recommend tools we’ve tested and believe in. Learn more.

Every week brings another article about how AI will replace programmers or how developers are 10x more productive with AI. The reality on the ground is more nuanced. Most working engineers use AI coding tools daily, but their workflows look nothing like the demos you see on social media. They are not generating entire applications from a single prompt. They are using AI tactically, for specific tasks where it genuinely helps, while maintaining full control over architecture, quality, and security.

This guide captures the best practices that have emerged from real engineering teams using AI coding tools in production environments. Not theory. Not hype. What actually works, what does not, and how to avoid the mistakes that waste more time than they save.

The 80/20 of AI Coding

After observing hundreds of developers work with AI tools, a clear pattern emerges: about 80% of the productivity gain comes from just a few use cases. Getting these right matters far more than mastering every feature.

The highest-value use cases for AI coding tools:

  1. Writing boilerplate and repetitive code: CRUD operations, API route handlers, form validation, test setup — tasks where the pattern is clear but the typing is tedious.
  2. Explaining unfamiliar code: New to a codebase or encountering an unfamiliar library? AI can explain what code does faster than reading documentation.
  3. Generating tests: Writing tests from implementation is one of the highest-ROI uses. The AI sees the function and generates edge cases you might miss.
  4. Code review as a second pair of eyes: Catching bugs, suggesting improvements, and verifying that changes match requirements.
  5. Quick lookups and syntax: Instead of switching to a browser to check API syntax, ask the AI inline. This keeps you in flow state.

Everything else — generating complex business logic, architectural design, security-critical code — can benefit from AI, but requires significantly more oversight and validation. Start with the high-value use cases and expand from there.

12 Best Practices That Actually Work

Prompt Engineering

1. Be Specific About Language, Framework, and Version

This is the most common failure point. “Write a server” gives the AI too much freedom. “Write an Express.js 4.18 route handler in TypeScript with Zod validation” gives it exactly the right constraints.

Always specify:

If you are using Cursor, put this information in your .cursorrules file so you do not have to repeat it in every prompt. If you use Claude Code, put it in your CLAUDE.md. Our Claude Code setup guide covers this in detail.

2. Provide Context with File References and Requirements

AI models produce better code when they can see related code in your project. Instead of describing your data model in words, reference the actual file. In Cursor, use @file to attach relevant files. In Claude Code, the tool reads files directly.

Effective context includes:

3. Iterate — First Output Is a Draft, Not Final Code

Treat AI output like a first draft from a junior developer. It gets the broad strokes right but needs refinement. Plan for 2-3 iterations:

  1. First pass: Generate the basic structure
  2. Second pass: Refine edge cases, error handling, and types
  3. Third pass: Optimize and clean up

This iterative approach produces better results than trying to get perfect output in a single prompt, no matter how detailed that prompt is. For more on prompting strategies, see our guide to writing better AI coding prompts.

Code Quality

4. Always Review AI-Generated Code Line by Line

This is the non-negotiable rule that separates professionals from amateurs. AI-generated code looks correct at a glance. It follows patterns, uses reasonable variable names, and usually compiles. But it contains subtle issues at a rate of roughly 10-20% of non-trivial generations:

Read every line. If you cannot explain what a line does, you should not ship it. For more on AI code review practices, see our AI code review tools comparison.

5. Run Tests Before and After AI Modifications

Establish a rhythm: run tests before the AI change (to establish a baseline), then run tests after. If tests fail after the AI change, you know exactly what broke and can either fix the generation or revert it.

# Before AI change: verify baseline
npm test

# After AI change: verify nothing broke
npm test

# If tests fail, check the diff
git diff

This is even more important with multi-file changes from tools like Cursor Composer or Claude Code, where the AI might modify shared utilities or configuration that affects other parts of the system.

6. Do Not Let AI Add Unnecessary Complexity

AI models tend to over-engineer. Ask for a simple utility function and you might get an abstract factory with dependency injection and three layers of interfaces. This happens because the models were trained on a vast corpus of code that includes enterprise-grade libraries alongside simple scripts.

Watch for these complexity red flags:

When you see this, push back: “Simplify this. Remove the abstraction layer. I need a simple function, not a framework.”

Workflow Integration

7. Use AI for Boilerplate, Not Business Logic

AI excels at code that follows established patterns: REST endpoints, database models, form validation, test setup, CI/CD configuration. This is boilerplate — code where the structure is well-known and the details vary slightly between implementations.

AI is weaker at business logic — the rules specific to your domain. A payment processing workflow, a matching algorithm, or a compliance rule engine involves domain-specific decisions that the AI cannot infer from your codebase. Write the business logic yourself, use AI for the infrastructure around it.

The dividing line: if a competent developer who knows nothing about your business could write it from a well-written spec, AI can probably handle it. If it requires domain knowledge and judgment calls, write it yourself.

8. Set Up Project-Level AI Instructions

Both Cursor (.cursorrules) and Claude Code (CLAUDE.md) support project-level configuration files that shape AI behavior. This is one of the highest-ROI investments you can make, and most developers skip it.

A good project instruction file includes:

This eliminates the need to repeat context in every prompt and ensures consistency across all team members using AI tools.

9. Use AI Code Review as a Second Pair of Eyes

Before submitting a PR, ask the AI to review your changes. This is not a replacement for human code review — it is an additional check that catches different things:

The key is to give the AI a focused review scope. “Review for security issues” or “Review for race conditions” produces better results than a generic “review this code.” See our guide to AI code review tools for tool-specific techniques.

Security

10. Never Trust AI with Secrets or Credentials

This should be obvious, but it happens more often than you would think. Never paste API keys, database credentials, or auth tokens into an AI prompt. Even with privacy modes enabled, treating any external service as fully trusted with your secrets is a bad security practice.

Instead:

11. Scan AI-Generated Code for Vulnerabilities

AI models can generate code with known vulnerability patterns. They were trained on public code that includes both secure and insecure examples. Common issues in AI-generated code:

Run security scanners (Snyk, Semgrep, or similar) on AI-generated code the same way you would on human-written code. Do not assume the AI “knows” about security best practices.

12. Validate All AI-Suggested Dependencies

When AI suggests installing a package, verify it before running npm install:

  1. Check the package exists: AI models sometimes hallucinate package names. Search npm to confirm.
  2. Check download counts: Low-download packages may be malicious typosquats.
  3. Check the last publish date: Abandoned packages may have unpatched vulnerabilities.
  4. Check the license: Ensure it is compatible with your project.
# Before installing an AI-suggested package
npm info package-name
# Check: version, last publish date, weekly downloads, license

Anti-Patterns: 5 Ways Teams Misuse AI Coding Tools

1. Accepting Code Without Reading It

The most dangerous anti-pattern. A developer asks AI to generate a function, gets output that looks reasonable, and merges it. Three weeks later, a production incident traces back to an edge case the AI did not handle. This happens regularly in teams that measure productivity by pull request volume instead of code quality.

The fix: Treat AI-generated code with the same scrutiny as a pull request from a new team member. Review it, test it, and make sure you understand what it does.

2. Using AI for Everything

There are diminishing returns. AI is excellent for tasks where it saves minutes and the output is verifiable. It is a net negative for tasks where the output takes longer to verify than it would take to write manually. A 5-line utility function might be faster to type yourself than to prompt, review, and correct AI output.

The rule of thumb: if you can write it faster than you can explain it, just write it.

3. Ignoring Tests Because “AI Wrote It”

Some developers develop false confidence in AI-generated code because it “looks right.” They skip writing tests because the AI “probably handled edge cases.” It did not. AI-generated code needs more testing, not less, because the developer did not write it and may not fully understand every decision in the implementation.

4. Copy-Pasting from AI Chat Without Understanding

Using AI chat (ChatGPT, Claude) to generate code snippets and pasting them into your project without understanding them is the modern equivalent of copy-pasting from Stack Overflow without reading the comments. It works until it does not, and when it breaks, you have no idea why.

The fix: If you use AI chat for code, understand the code before integrating it. If you cannot explain every line, either learn what it does or do not use it.

5. Over-Relying on One Tool

Each AI coding tool has strengths and weaknesses. Cursor excels at codebase-aware editing. Claude Code is strong at autonomous multi-step tasks. Copilot is efficient for inline completions. Using only one tool for everything means you are using a hammer for tasks that need a screwdriver.

Evaluate multiple tools and use each where it is strongest. For a comprehensive comparison, see our guide to AI coding tools in 2026.

Real-World Workflow Examples

Solo Developer Daily Workflow

Here is what a typical day looks like for a solo developer using AI tools effectively:

  1. Morning: Plan the day. Open the chat, describe what you are building today, and ask the AI to help break it into tasks. This is brainstorming, not delegation.
  2. Feature development: Write the core logic yourself. Use AI for boilerplate (API routes, form validation, database models). Use Cmd+K or inline edits for small refactors as you go.
  3. Testing: After each feature, select the implementation and ask AI to generate tests. Review the generated tests to make sure they cover real edge cases, not just happy paths.
  4. Code review: Before committing, ask AI to review your changes for bugs, security issues, and inconsistencies.
  5. Documentation: Use AI to generate JSDoc comments, README updates, and API documentation from your implementation. This is one of AI’s best use cases — it is faster and often more thorough than writing docs manually.

Team Code Review with AI

AI-assisted code review works best as a pre-check before human review:

  1. Developer opens a PR
  2. CI pipeline runs automated AI review (tools like CodeRabbit or Cursor’s review feature)
  3. AI flags potential issues, security concerns, and style violations
  4. Developer addresses AI feedback
  5. Human reviewer focuses on architecture, business logic, and design decisions

This workflow reduces the number of trivial comments in human reviews (missing error handling, inconsistent naming) and lets human reviewers focus on the decisions that actually matter.

Debugging a Production Issue with AI

When a production issue hits, AI can accelerate diagnosis:

  1. Describe the symptoms: Paste error messages, stack traces, and relevant logs into the AI chat.
  2. Provide context: Reference the relevant code files. In Cursor, use @file to attach them. In Claude Code, let the tool read them directly.
  3. Ask for hypotheses: “Based on this error and the code, what are the most likely causes? Rank by probability.”
  4. Validate each hypothesis: Do not blindly apply the AI’s first suggestion. Check each hypothesis against the evidence (logs, metrics, recent changes).
  5. Implement the fix: Once you identify the cause, use AI to help write the fix and the test that prevents regression.

The AI is not debugging for you — it is helping you generate and evaluate hypotheses faster than you could alone. Your judgment about which hypothesis is correct still matters. For more on using AI in debugging workflows, check our guide on AI-assisted refactoring.

Where to Deploy
Need hosting that works well with AI coding workflows? DigitalOcean offers great developer-friendly VPS hosting, and Kinsta handles managed WordPress with built-in CI/CD.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are AI coding tools actually making developers more productive?

Yes, but the gains vary wildly. Studies from GitHub and independent researchers consistently show 20-50% speedups on specific tasks (boilerplate, tests, documentation). However, overall productivity improvement is harder to measure because time saved generating code is partially offset by time spent reviewing AI output. The developers who gain the most are those who use AI selectively for its strongest use cases rather than trying to AI-generate everything.

Will AI replace software engineers?

Not in the foreseeable future. AI tools are excellent at generating code that follows known patterns. They are poor at understanding business requirements, making architectural trade-offs, debugging novel issues, and communicating with stakeholders. The role of a software engineer is shifting toward more oversight and less typing, but the judgment, creativity, and domain knowledge that define the role remain firmly human.

Should I use AI tools in technical interviews?

Follow the company’s policy. Some companies explicitly allow AI tools in take-home assessments, and some ban them in live coding interviews. Using AI where it is prohibited is a guaranteed rejection. Where it is allowed, use it the way you would in production: as an assistant that accelerates your work, not as a replacement for your skills.

How do I convince my team to adopt AI coding tools?

Start with data, not hype. Run a two-week pilot with 2-3 willing developers on a real project. Measure specific metrics: time to complete tasks, bugs caught in review, test coverage. Present the results along with an honest assessment of where AI helped and where it did not. Teams adopt tools that demonstrably improve their work, not tools that sound impressive in demos.

Which AI coding tool should I start with?

It depends on your workflow. If you live in VS Code, start with Cursor or Copilot. If you prefer terminal-based workflows, try Claude Code. If you want a purpose-built AI editor, look at Windsurf. The best tool is the one that fits your existing workflow with the least friction. See our complete guide to AI coding tools for help choosing.

Affiliate Disclosure: Some links on this page are affiliate links. If you click through and make a purchase, RunAICode may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. We only recommend tools we have personally tested and believe provide value. See our full disclosure policy.