Blog | Zencoder – The AI Coding Agent

5 Vibe Coding Risks and Ways to Avoid Them in 2025

Written by Federico Trotta | Apr 2, 2025 2:15:45 PM

In software development, "vibe coding" has recently emerged as a transformative approach that's reshaping how we build applications. This AI-assisted coding methodology, where developers describe desired functionality in natural language and let AI generate the underlying code, promises unprecedented speed and accessibility. However, as with any technological revolution, it brings significant risks that demand our attention.

For software engineers navigating this new paradigm in 2025, understanding these risks and implementing effective mitigation strategies is essential for maintaining code quality, security, and long-term project success.

Let’s dive in!

Technical Debt Accumulation

The allure of rapid development through vibe coding often masks a growing problem beneath the surface: technical debt. When developers prioritize speed over structure, they're essentially taking out a "loan" against future maintenance and scalability.

Symptoms of Vibe-Induced Technical Debt

Technical debt from vibe coding manifests in several distinct ways. First, inconsistent coding patterns emerge as AI generates solutions based on different prompts without a unified architectural vision. This creates a patchwork codebase where similar problems are solved in dissimilar ways. Second, documentation becomes sparse or nonexistent, as the focus shifts to prompt engineering rather than explaining code functionality. Finally, quick solutions are prioritized over maintainable ones, leading to what one developer described as "vibe-coded messes" that become increasingly difficult to untangle.

As noted by Ben Lorica in a March 2025 article on Gradient Flow, "AI-generated code often lacks the structure, documentation, and clarity necessary for long-term maintenance. This can lead to increased technical debt, making future modifications and debugging significantly more difficult, potentially requiring costly rewrites" (Gradient Flow, 2025).

Impact on Project Lifecycle

The consequences of this accumulated debt extend throughout the project lifecycle. Maintenance costs increase dramatically as developers spend more time deciphering AI-generated code than implementing new features. Onboarding new team members becomes a significant challenge, as they struggle to understand the codebase's underlying logic and structure. Most critically, feature development slows over time, creating a paradoxical situation where the initial speed gains from vibe coding are eventually negated by mounting technical debt.

A March 2025 blog post from CodingIT highlights this problem: "A team that leans too heavily on AI might seem efficient at first, but if they're constantly revisiting past work and fixing AI-generated messes, they're not moving forward, they're just running in circles" (CodingIT, 2025).

Mitigation Strategies

To combat technical debt in vibe coding environments, implement these proven strategies:

  1. Regular code reviews: Establish a rigorous review process specifically designed for AI-generated code. Focus on identifying inconsistencies, redundancies, and architectural misalignments.
  2. Technical debt tracking systems: Implement tools like SonarQube or Debttrack to quantify and visualize technical debt. This makes the invisible visible and helps prioritize refactoring efforts.
  3. Scheduled refactoring sprints: Dedicate specific sprint cycles to refactoring AI-generated code. This prevents technical debt from accumulating beyond manageable levels.

Security Vulnerabilities

Perhaps the most critical risk in vibe coding is the introduction of security vulnerabilities. AI models generate code based on patterns they've learned, but they lack a deep understanding of security implications.

Common Security Gaps in Vibe Coding

Several security vulnerabilities consistently appear in vibe-coded applications. First, input validation is often overlooked or implemented incorrectly, creating openings for injection attacks. Second, error handling tends to be generic, potentially exposing sensitive system information. Third, AI frequently incorporates outdated or insecure third-party dependencies without proper vetting.

A March 2025 report from Analytics India Magazine highlighted a real-world example: "Recently, an X user deployed Cursor to build a SaaS app and emphasised that AI was not just an assistant but also a builder. A few days later, he shared that someone was trying to find security vulnerabilities in his app. The next day, he took to X and said he was under attack" (Analytics India Magazine, 2025).

Potential Consequences

The consequences of these security gaps can be severe. Data breaches resulting from insecure code can expose sensitive customer information, leading to significant financial and reputational damage. Compliance violations may occur when AI-generated code fails to implement required security controls, resulting in regulatory penalties. The reputational damage from security incidents can be long-lasting and difficult to repair.

Santiago Valdarrama, a computer scientist, noted on social media: "Vibe-coding is awesome, but the code these models generate is full of security holes and can be easily hacked" (Analytics India Magazine, 2025).

Prevention Techniques

To mitigate security risks in vibe-coded applications:

  1. Automated security scanning: Implement tools like OWASP ZAP, Snyk, or SonarQube Security to automatically scan AI-generated code for common vulnerabilities.
  2. Security-focused code reviews: Conduct specialized security reviews of AI-generated code, focusing on input validation, authentication, authorization, and data protection.
  3. Regular security training: Ensure developers understand common security vulnerabilities and how to identify them in AI-generated code.

Scalability Issues

While vibe coding excels at rapid prototyping, it often creates applications that struggle to scale under real-world conditions. The focus on immediate functionality can lead to architectural decisions that become bottlenecks as user numbers grow.

Scalability Chellanges from Vibe Coding

Vibe coding introduces several scalability challenges. Inefficient resource utilization is common, as AI tends to prioritize straightforward solutions over optimized ones. Database query optimization is frequently overlooked, leading to performance degradation as data volumes increase. Perhaps most significantly, vibe coding often results in monolithic architecture tendencies, making it difficult to scale individual components independently.

According to a March 2025 article on Index.dev, "Rapid code generation can lead to technical debt, making future modifications and scalability challenging" (Index.dev, 2025).

Business Impact

The business implications of these scalability issues are substantial. Performance degradation under load leads to poor user experience and potential customer loss. Cloud computing costs increase dramatically as inefficient code requires more resources to maintain acceptable performance. Most critically, limited growth potential can constrain business expansion, forcing companies to choose between major rewrites or accepting artificial growth ceilings.

Engineering Solutions

To address scalability challenges in vibe-coded applications:

  1. Performance testing requirements: Establish clear performance benchmarks and regularly test AI-generated code against them, identifying bottlenecks before they impact users.
  2. Microservices architecture adoption: Refactor monolithic vibe-coded applications into microservices, allowing individual components to scale independently.
  3. Scalability-focused design reviews: Conduct specialized reviews focusing on database access patterns, caching strategies, and resource utilization.

Reduced Code Maintainability

Maintainability is perhaps the most underappreciated aspect of software development, yet it directly impacts long-term project success. Vibe coding, with its emphasis on rapid generation over thoughtful design, often produces code that's difficult to maintain.

Maintainability Red Flags

Several red flags indicate maintainability issues in vibe-coded applications. High cyclomatic complexity is common, as AI tends to generate nested conditional logic rather than cleaner alternatives. Duplicate code patterns emerge when similar functionality is implemented through different prompts. Unclear naming conventions are prevalent, as AI may not follow consistent naming standards across the codebase.

As noted in a March 2025 article on ikangai.com, "Vibe coding, in its pure form, trades away maintainability for short-term productivity. Since code is generated and modified in a very ad-hoc manner based on iterative prompting, the end result may lack a coherent structure or clear rationale documented in the code" (ikangai.com, 2025).

Long-term Consequences

The long-term consequences of reduced maintainability are significant. Knowledge silos form when only the original prompt engineers understand certain parts of the codebase. Bug rates increase as developers struggle to understand and modify complex, poorly documented code. Developer frustration and turnover rise as team members become demoralized by working with unmaintainable code.

Best Practices

To improve maintainability in vibe-coded applications:

  1. Enforcing coding standards: Establish clear coding standards and ensure AI-generated code is refactored to comply with them.
  2. Documentation requirements: Require comprehensive documentation for all AI-generated code, explaining not just what it does but why certain approaches were chosen.
  3. Pair programming sessions: Implement pair programming where one developer focuses on understanding and documenting AI-generated code while the other focuses on refactoring for maintainability.

Testing Gaps in Vibe Coding

Several testing gaps are common in vibe-coded applications. Insufficient test coverage is prevalent, as developers may not write tests for AI-generated code they don't fully understand. Inconsistent test approaches emerge when different team members test different parts of the application without a unified strategy. Manual testing often replaces automated testing, leading to inconsistent results and missed edge cases.

Quality Implications

These testing gaps have serious quality implications. Regression issues become common as changes to one part of the codebase unexpectedly affect others. Release quality becomes unpredictable, with some releases introducing significant new bugs. QA cycles extend as testers struggle to manually verify all aspects of the application.

Testing Framework Solutions

To improve testing in vibe-coded applications:

  1. Test-driven development adoption: Implement TDD practices where tests are written before AI generates code, ensuring the code meets specific requirements.
  2. Continuous integration enforcement: Establish CI pipelines that automatically run comprehensive test suites on all code changes, including AI-generated ones.
  3. Test coverage requirements: Set minimum test coverage thresholds that must be met before code can be merged into the main codebase.

Implementing a Balanced Approach

While the risks of vibe coding are significant, they can be mitigated through a balanced approach that preserves developer creativity while ensuring code quality and maintainability.

Preserving Developer Creativity

Vibe coding can be beneficial in specific contexts. It excels in rapid prototyping, allowing developers to quickly test ideas and iterate on designs. It creates space for experimentation, enabling teams to explore multiple approaches before committing to a specific implementation. However, it's important to balance innovation with standards, establishing clear guidelines for when vibe coding is appropriate and when more traditional approaches are necessary.

Building a Sustainable Engineering Culture

Creating a sustainable engineering culture in the age of vibe coding requires intentional effort. Team agreements on coding practices help establish shared expectations around code quality and review processes. Mentorship programs pair experienced developers with those newer to the field, ensuring knowledge transfer and consistent application of best practices. Recognition for quality code, not just feature delivery, reinforces the importance of maintainability and security.

Conclusion

As we navigate the evolving landscape of software development in 2025, vibe coding presents both exciting opportunities and significant risks. The five critical risks we've explored—technical debt, security vulnerabilities, scalability issues, reduced maintainability, and testing inadequacies—require proactive strategies and thoughtful implementation.

How Zencoder Can Help

Fortunately, modern tools are emerging to help developers balance the speed of vibe coding with the discipline required for production-quality code. Zencoder stands out as a particularly valuable resource in this space. By leveraging Zencoder's advanced code analysis capabilities, development teams can automatically identify potential issues before they become embedded in the codebase.

Zencoder's pattern recognition functionality helps detect technical debt in real-time, while its security scanning features identify vulnerabilities that might otherwise go unnoticed in rapidly developed code. For teams concerned about maintainability, Zencoder offers documentation generation and code structure visualization that make complex vibe-coded systems more accessible to all team members.

Try out Zencoder and share your experience by leaving a comment below. Don’t forget to subscribe to Zencoder to stay informed about the latest AI-driven strategies for improving your code governance. Your insights, questions, and feedback can help shape the future of coding practices.