AI doesn't hesitate.

Ask it something it doesn't know, and it won't admit uncertainty. It will give you a confident, well-structured, completely wrong answer.

This is the most dangerous thing about using AI for development. Not when it fails obviously—but when it fails invisibly.

The Confidence Problem

AI models are trained to be helpful. This creates a fundamental issue:

Saying "I don't know" feels unhelpful. So models fill gaps with plausible-sounding content.

Uncertainty isn't expressed. The answer sounds the same whether the model is certain or guessing.

Structure implies correctness. Well-formatted, detailed responses feel authoritative—even when wrong.

You can't rely on tone to detect errors. You need other methods.

Common Failure Modes

Patterns where AI tends to fail:

Recent changes. Libraries update. APIs change. AI training has cutoffs. Answers about the "latest" version might be outdated.

Niche libraries. Popular frameworks have tons of training data. Obscure libraries? The model might be extrapolating from limited examples.

Complex configuration. Specific combinations of settings, environments, and versions. Too many variables to predict accurately.

"Best practices" claims. The model synthesizes common patterns. Common isn't always correct. Popular advice can be outdated or wrong.

Your specific context. AI doesn't know your codebase, your constraints, your team's decisions. It answers generically.

Red Flags

Signs the AI might be wrong:

Extreme confidence on contested topics. "The best way to do X is always Y." Rarely true.

Outdated syntax or patterns. The code looks old. References deprecated methods.

Answers that don't match documentation. When you check the docs and they say something different.

Too-simple solutions to complex problems. The answer is suspiciously short for a genuinely hard problem.

Contradicting itself. Ask the same question differently and get a different answer.

None of these prove incorrectness. But they're signals to verify.

The Verification Habit

Treat AI output as a first draft, not a source of truth:

Run the code. Does it actually work? Syntax errors, runtime failures, and wrong outputs reveal problems.

Check the docs. For APIs and libraries, verify against official documentation.

Test edge cases. AI often handles the happy path. What about nulls, empty arrays, error conditions?

Ask differently. Rephrase your question. Compare answers. Inconsistency reveals uncertainty.

Use your experience. If something feels off, investigate. Your intuition is data.

Developing Judgment

Over time, you develop instincts:

Domain knowledge helps. The more you know, the more easily you spot errors. Keep learning.

Pattern recognition improves. You start noticing when AI answers feel template-generated versus genuinely reasoned.

Healthy skepticism grows. Not cynicism—skepticism. Trust but verify becomes automatic.

You know your blind spots. Some topics you can verify yourself. Others you can't. Know which is which.

When to Trust

It's not all skepticism. AI is reliably good at:

Common patterns. Boilerplate, standard CRUD operations, well-documented APIs.

Syntax and format. The mechanical aspects of code generation.

Explaining concepts. General explanations of how things work.

Starting points. First drafts you'll verify and refine.

Trust increases when the task is common, the stakes are low, and verification is easy.

When to Verify Everything

High stakes require more caution:

Security-related code. Authentication, authorization, encryption. Security mistakes can be catastrophic.

Financial calculations. Money math needs to be correct.

Data handling. Privacy, compliance, data integrity.

Anything you're deploying. Production code deserves verification.

For these areas, AI is an assistant, not an authority.

Building Verification into Workflow

Make verification automatic:

Write tests first. AI generates implementation. Tests verify correctness.

Require manual review. Don't copy-paste without reading.

Use multiple sources. AI output plus documentation plus running code.

Code review habits. Even AI-generated code should be reviewed.

The goal: never deploy something just because AI said it was right.

The Human in the Loop

AI doesn't replace judgment. It augments capability.

You remain responsible for:

  • Deciding what to build
  • Verifying correctness
  • Understanding the code you ship
  • Catching AI mistakes

AI that's occasionally wrong is still useful. You just need to maintain your role as the check on its output.

Related Reading