Definition
A software-development method in which a coding agent does more than suggest the next line. Given a goal and a working environment, it can inspect a repository, plan a change, edit files, run tests and other tools, read the results, and revise its work. A human usually supplies the objective and retains some combination of steering, review, approval, and accountability.
The phrase describes how work is performed, not how autonomous or reliable the system is. One developer may watch every command and correct the agent in real time. Another may send a task to a background agent and inspect only the pull request. Both are doing agentic coding, but their authority boundaries and evidence requirements are different.
What changes in practice
The developer's leverage moves from typing each implementation detail toward preparing the environment in which the agent works. Repository instructions, reproducible setup, clear acceptance criteria, fast feedback, and inspectable tool results become part of the engineering surface. Research on real coding-agent use also shows that domain expertise continues to matter: delegation does not remove the need to recognize a wrong plan, a misleading test, or a locally inappropriate change.
Distinguish it from nearby terms
Code generation may stop after one model response. A coding assistant generally stays inside a human-led interaction. Agentic coding includes a multi-step execution loop. A dark software factory goes further by making a claim about the full production system, including independent verification, promotion, observation, rollback, and reduced routine human intervention.
Check your understanding
A developer asks an agent to add an endpoint, watches it inspect routes and tests, reviews the diff, and decides whether to merge. That is agentic coding. It is not evidence that the organization can accept and ship agent work without that developer's review.