Addy Osmani’s LLM coding workflow going into 2026 appears very similar to my own, though an interesting note on articles like this is that the reader can interpret the language used in different ways. Claude Code has an excellent /plan capability that Opus 4.5 excels on. I do plan, and I do write specs from time to time, but I also one-shot and two-shot changes and my actual development looks like a mixture of these. At no time do i generate pages and pages of specs and then have the LLM embark on a long horizon delivery period and not look at the code it wrote. Addy points out in anther post the importance of understanding the code with ideas like:

If you skip review, you don’t eliminate work - you defer it

And also links to another article noting that skipping review results in:

No consistency, no overarching plan. It’s like I’d asked 10 junior-mid developers to work on this codebase, with no Git access, locking them in a room without seeing what the other 9 were doing

This is inline with my findings and against a popular (hype) argument that an increase in code volume due to LLMs needs to be accompanied with a decrease in human-in-the-loop because speed. This is a drop in quality, which is deferred until your customer’s are affected and your DORA metrics deteriorate.