The few times I've done that, the agent eventually faced a problem/bug it couldn't solve and I had to go and read the entire codebase myself.
Then, found several subtle bugs (like writing private keys to disk even when that was an explicit instruction not to). Eventually ended up refactoring most of it.
It does have value on coming up with boilerplate code that I then tweak.
which might be fine if you're doing proof of concept or low risk code, but it can also bite you hard when there is a bug actively bleeding money and not a single person or AI agent in the house that knows how anything work
calling this snake oil is like when the horse carriage riders were against cars.
Understanding of the code in these situation is more important than the code/feature existing.
I think the reality is a lot of code out there doesn’t need to be good, so many people benefit from agents etc.
Agents make mistakes which need to be corrected, but they also point out edge cases you haven’t thought of.
This is negligence, it's your job to understand the system you're building.
We've been unfucking architecture done like that for a month after the dev that had hallucination session with their AI left.