How do you decide whether a coding agent should plan before editing?
Instruction: Describe when planning adds value before code changes.
Updated
Example Answer
I'd plan when the change has dependencies or uncertainty that should be resolved before editing. Renaming a public request field needs a short plan covering the server, callers, compatibility behavior, and tests. Correcting a typo in a comment may need no separate planning step.
The plan should name the likely files, the behavior being changed, and how completion will be checked. If inspection shows an additional caller or a migration, I'd revise the plan before widening the patch. I'd also compare the final diff with the plan; otherwise it becomes prose that never constrains execution. Planning earns its cost by revealing a missed dependency, not by being long.
Why this works
Shows when planning changes an engineering decision and how the plan remains useful during execution.
Practice follow-up
What discovery should trigger replanning rather than an immediate extra edit?
Your preparation path
Work through these questions in order. Read the answer aloud, then explain it in your own words.
1. Start with the foundations
Build the vocabulary and explain the core decisions.
2. Apply it to a real workflow
Practice diagnosis, validation, and everyday tradeoffs.
3. Prepare for senior discussions
Explain failure boundaries, recovery, and production choices.
- A coding agent can modify infrastructure, app code, and data access layers in one task. How do you constrain it? Member answer
- Two coding agents change an API and its client in parallel. How would you integrate their work safely? Member answer
- A coding-agent hook runs before the repository trust prompt. What is wrong with that design? Member answer
Related Questions
-
easy
-
easy
-
easy
-
easy
-
easy
-
easy