AI-augmented, not AI-generated: my development workflow

There's a growing wave of "AI-generated websites" — tools that spit out generic templates from a text prompt. They all look the same. They all feel the same. They're fast, but they're forgettable.

My approach is different. I use AI (specifically Claude Code) as an accelerator, not a generator. Every design decision is mine. Every animation is hand-tuned. AI handles the repetitive parts so I can focus on what matters: making something that stands out.

What AI does in my workflow

Scaffolding:: Generating boilerplate — component structure, TypeScript types, CSS modules. This saves 30 minutes per component.
Content drafts:: First pass at copy, meta descriptions, alt texts. I always rewrite, but having a starting point helps.
Code review:: Catching accessibility issues, performance bottlenecks, TypeScript errors.
Iteration speed:: "Make this animation 20% faster, add a slight bounce" — AI applies changes instantly while I focus on the feel.

What AI does NOT do

Design direction.: I choose the fonts, colors, layout, mood. AI doesn't have taste.
Motion design.: Timing, easing, choreography — these require feeling the rhythm. AI can write GSAP code, but it can't tell you if the animation feels right.
Client communication.: Understanding what a client actually needs vs. what they say they need — that's human territory.
Quality judgment.: Knowing when something is "done" and when it needs one more iteration.

The speed advantage

With AI assistance, I ship a complete landing page in 3–4 hours instead of 2–3 days. That's a 5–10x speedup on execution, with no loss in quality — because the creative decisions are still human.

The anti-pattern

The worst use of AI is "generate a website for a yoga studio." You get a yoga-studio-shaped template with stock imagery and generic copy. It converts like every other AI-generated site: poorly.

The best use of AI is pairing it with a developer who has strong opinions about design, knows the tools deeply, and uses AI to remove friction — not to remove thinking.

That's what 6METHODS is: AI-augmented craft.

What AI does in my workflow

Scaffolding:: Generating boilerplate — component structure, TypeScript types, CSS modules. This saves 30 minutes per component.

Content drafts:: First pass at copy, meta descriptions, alt texts. I always rewrite, but having a starting point helps.

Code review:: Catching accessibility issues, performance bottlenecks, TypeScript errors.

Iteration speed:: "Make this animation 20% faster, add a slight bounce" — AI applies changes instantly while I focus on the feel.

What AI does NOT do

Design direction.: I choose the fonts, colors, layout, mood. AI doesn't have taste.

Motion design.: Timing, easing, choreography — these require feeling the rhythm. AI can write GSAP code, but it can't tell you if the animation feels right.

Client communication.: Understanding what a client actually needs vs. what they say they need — that's human territory.

Quality judgment.: Knowing when something is "done" and when it needs one more iteration.

The anti-pattern

The worst use of AI is "generate a website for a yoga studio." You get a yoga-studio-shaped template with stock imagery and generic copy. It converts like every other AI-generated site: poorly.

The best use of AI is pairing it with a developer who has strong opinions about design, knows the tools deeply, and uses AI to remove friction — not to remove thinking.

That's what 6METHODS is: AI-augmented craft.