> It's an active engagement and best results are achieved when everything is planned and laid out in advance — which can also be done via vibe coding.
No.
The general assumed definition of vibe coding, hence the vibe word, is that coding becomes an iterative process guided by intuition rather than spec and processes.
What you describe is literally the opposite of vibe coding, it feels the term is being warped into "coding with an LLM".
I've described an iterative process where one never needs to touch code or documents directly.
Leaving out specs and documentation leads to more slop and hallucinations, especially with smaller models.