I was using Codex to build a side project over the weekend. A lazy vibe-coding session with no wireframes, Figma screens, or specs. Just an idea and an endless prompt thread with an AI. As I ran out of tokens at record speed, I realized that the way I think as a designer is fundamentally incompatible with how AI coding tools are meant to be used. The way designers think, aka the design proces s When I start designing something, I don't know what the final outcome will look like. I have a feeling. A loose sense of what the experience should be. The layout, style, flows, interactions, edge cases are details that emerge through making and exploring. Here's what this looks like translated into Codex: I give it a vague prompt. I see what it creates. I react. I give it more specific instructions. We go back and forth, reverting, detailing, testing and fixing. Iterations in, the product slowly starts to reveal itself. This is the process. This is design. It is through loops of this process that the core problem emerges. Tools like Codex and Claude Code are built for workflows where you know exactly what you want. An engineer using Claude Code starts with a clear description of what should be built and the AI implements it. The output is controlled and predetermined. The tool is a medium for execution, not exploration. But a designer is not doing that. I don't have the answer at the start. I'm finding the answer by building. The spectrum, as it stands