My company is doing this too. Our marketing team can use cursor web agents to make coding changes to the marketing website/blog/landing pages. The agents make the code change and make PRs in github where our tech team reviews it before merging. The marketing team is almost entirely non-technical.
How about a security leak (say.. Vercel) and having to run down all of these non-technical folks and getting them to rotate env vars? Or ask them to not do things on their personal account?
Yeah this sounds pretty reasonable really, like instead of using a CMS directly they’re having Claude file PRs to make the same changes. As someone who likes static sites and change control, it actually sounds like an improvement.
Despite my own personal preference for static sites, marketing using a CMS under their own control to make content updates seems vastly more reasonable than vibe coding open ended PRs as a codebase they don't understand gradually grows in complexity over time.
They could even use one of many headless CMSs combined with a static generator. Claude Code in the hands of non-technical users deploying to prod regularly seems like one of the worst possible ways to do it (except for the "cool" value telling people about it).
At my company the internal devs don't even have access to wherever the company site is hosted, it's a WordPress CMS and marketing can make updates safely with a couple clicks and zero day-to-day development oversight required. IT just helps keep the box updated but otherwise it's entirely their own thing.
I was thinking the same thing. Advertising or the wording and layout of information on a website is a different level of complexity to monetary calculations that have legislated paths and outcomes, for example.
As difficult as it is to use CSS to centre a field, the stakes are in a different ball park.
I'm sure a lot of companies are doing that as described (mine too), but I have never in my life heard someone classify website/blog/landing page changes as "production code".
I have non-technical people vibe coding internal tooling that the engineering team simply hasn't had time to get to [1]. It's been a big help internally. Maintenance isn't an issue because the effort to create it was so low, they'd just throw it away and create it again if necessary.
[1] Of course permissions are such that the tools can't do anything that would damage any of the systems.
Contrary to sentiment in this thread, I am seeing positive effects of designers and PMs using AI. Skilled designers can now own how their components look and feel with guardrails.
The way i look at it is: those users are going to ask differing questions than engineering that may lead to possibilities not considered, thought of, believed possible, etc.. which can be a good thing, when harnessed correctly*.
I'd love to hear more about the positive effects of designers and PMs using AI, especially more on the PM side, if you care to go into more detail
