Vibe Coders Build and Rebuild, They Do Not Migrate
Posted 2026-01-26
Throwaway apps aren't a bug.
They're the workflow.
The wall
You built something. It works. You deployed it, maybe even turned it into a small business. The AI tools got you there: you described what you wanted, iterated on the prompts, and shipped.
Then the API you're using releases a new version. Or you need to swap out the backend. Or someone asks for a feature that touches three files you've never opened.
You stare at the codebase. You paste the error into the AI. It suggests changes. You apply them. Something else breaks. You prompt again. Same loop. Thirty minutes later, you're no closer to a working app than when you started.
This is the migration wall. And if you don't have a software engineering background, it's often harder than the original build.
"We're at this very strange time where people can build an initial prototype and kind of get it working enough to kind of deploy it to even turn it into a small business. But given that they don't have software engineering backgrounds, it's still a struggle for them to make updates, to swap out backends, to migrate from one release of an API to another."
Paige Bailey, Roo Cast S01E14
The pattern: rebuild, don't migrate
The emerging behavior is predictable: if the change is bigger than a prompt can handle, people start over.
This isn't laziness. It's rational. You can describe the whole app from scratch in a prompt. But without the underlying concepts, describing the surgical change needed to migrate a database schema is much harder.
The apps become disposable. Version 1 ships. Version 2 is a new repo.
"All of these earlier career builders are creating apps and the apps are effectively throwaway apps where, you know, if they need to make even smaller changes or upgrade to significantly new architectures, then they're going to rebuild as opposed to migrating existing systems."
Paige Bailey, Roo Cast S01E14
This works up to a point. If your app is simple enough to rebuild in an afternoon, rebuilding is fine. But the pattern breaks when the app gets complicated enough that rebuilding takes longer than you have, and migrating requires skills you don't.
The handoff question
This matters if you're a PM shipping prototypes, a marketer building landing pages, or an analyst creating internal tools. At some point, the prototype might be ready for production. The question becomes: can an engineer take this codebase and work with it, or does it need to be rebuilt with proper structure first?
The answer depends on what artifacts exist around the code.
A codebase with issues, PR history, and review comments is a handoff. A codebase that exists as a single "vibe" is a spec at best—and often missing the breadcrumbs an engineer needs.
What this means for your workflow
If you're building with AI tools and want your work to survive beyond the first version, think about the handoff from day one.
This doesn't mean learning software engineering. It means using tools that create engineering artifacts as a side effect of your building process.
When an AI coding agent proposes changes, runs tests, and iterates based on real outputs, it generates a trail: task logs, diffs, issues, PR comments. That trail is what lets an engineer pick up where you left off without starting from scratch.
The alternative is the current pattern: you build, you hit a wall, you rebuild. Each version is standalone. Each migration is a new build.
Why this matters for your team
If you're a team lead evaluating how to onboard non-technical contributors, this is the question to ask: what happens when their prototype is ready for production?
The vibe coder who shipped a working prototype is a success story. The vibe coder whose prototype needs to be thrown away and rebuilt by engineering is a bottleneck that just moved.
The handoff story is the difference. Artifacts make the prototype into a starting point. No artifacts make it into a requirements doc with extra steps.
If you're building something you want to keep, build with tools that leave a trail.