Agile Manifesto at 25: AI and Vibe Coding Challenge Core Principles

Agile Manifesto at 25: AI and Vibe Coding Challenge Core Principles

Twenty-five years after 17 software pioneers gathered at a Utah ski resort to articulate a revolutionary vision for software development, the Agile Manifesto finds itself at an inflection point — not due to internal dissent, but because of external disruption. Artificial intelligence, particularly through emerging practices like "vibe coding," is reshaping how code is written, reviewed, and deployed. According to Jon Kern, one of the original signatories of the Agile Manifesto, AI tools are not merely augmenting developer productivity; they are redefining the very human-centric values that Agile was built upon.

First published in 2001, the Agile Manifesto emphasized four core values: individuals and interactions over processes and tools; working software over comprehensive documentation; customer collaboration over contract negotiation; and responding to change over following a plan. These principles emerged from a collective frustration with rigid, documentation-heavy methodologies like Waterfall. As described in a detailed retrospective on Zhihu, Agile was never a single methodology but a philosophy — a "set of values and principles" that prioritized adaptability, face-to-face communication, and self-organizing teams. Frameworks like Scrum and Kanban evolved as practical implementations of these ideals.

Today, AI-driven coding assistants such as GitHub Copilot, Amazon CodeWhisperer, and Google’s Gemini Code assist developers by generating entire functions, suggesting optimizations, and even writing tests. While this accelerates delivery — aligning with Agile’s emphasis on frequent releases — it also undermines one of its foundational tenets: the primacy of human collaboration. "Vibe coding," a term recently popularized among early adopters, describes a workflow where developers provide high-level intent or even vague prompts to AI models, then iterate based on outputs without deep understanding of the underlying logic. Kern, in an interview with The Register, admitted he was "smitten" by the speed but cautioned that "you can’t inspect what you can’t explain."

This tension is profound. Agile’s strength has always been its emphasis on transparency and collective ownership. When code is generated by a black-box AI, who is accountable? Who reviews the architectural decisions? Who ensures that the codebase remains maintainable five years from now? Traditional Agile ceremonies — stand-ups, retrospectives, planning sessions — were designed to surface these questions. But in vibe coding environments, developers often skip the dialogue, relying on the AI’s output as gospel.

Moreover, the manifesto’s call for "face-to-face communication" is increasingly replaced by asynchronous, AI-mediated interactions. Teams no longer debate requirements over coffee; they prompt LLMs and accept the results. While this may reduce friction in the short term, it risks eroding the team’s collective understanding — the very glue that Agile relies on to adapt to change.

Yet, the response need not be resistance. As Zhihu’s knowledge archive notes, Agile has always evolved — from early lightweight methods like XP and DSDM in the 1990s to today’s hybrid models. The challenge now is to integrate AI not as a replacement for human judgment, but as a collaborator. Some forward-thinking teams are experimenting with "AI retrospectives," where teams audit AI-generated code for bias, technical debt, and alignment with domain knowledge. Others are embedding prompt engineering into their Agile rituals, treating AI inputs as first-class artifacts to be reviewed.

As the software industry enters 2026, the Agile Manifesto’s relevance hinges on its ability to evolve. Kern’s insight is clear: AI doesn’t make Agile obsolete — it makes it more necessary than ever. But only if we reclaim agency over the tools we build with. The next 25 years won’t be about choosing between humans and machines. They’ll be about designing systems where both thrive — together.