Way too short sighted. You're still operating under the (mistaken) beliefs that

  1. The write terrible unmaintainable code
  2. They can't just improve any code retrospectively
  3. You're going to be maintaining it

I am now writing home projects where I am actually "vibe coding", to an extent. In my job, I can't do this because other people still review my work and will complain about things that don't match our human invented patterns for software development, and more importantly, I am actually responsible for this code and if it goes wrong our firm goes bust.

But, I genuinely mean it when I say that we are not far away from the point where verifications (functional, non-functional), as long as they're comprehensive enough, will be all that is required, and I don't expect to be reading the nitty gritty details of PRs in a few years time.

It is only a mess if it doesn't work correctly in a functional and non-functional sense. All other coding conventions are invented to make it easier for humans to maintain code. Agents don't care, they will happily chug away pressing the virtual keys endlessly, changing whatever the previous agent left.

AIs do a good job of maintaining their own code, including refactoring, increasing test coverage, ensuring documentation doesn't become stale, updating dependencies. They've been extensively trained to perform pretty much all of the functions of maintaining codebases and they do it far more diligently than most people.

... then what's the point of the harness?