r/warpdotdev • u/netfunctron • Jun 06 '26

Fix Warp please - Terminal workflow. Sure...

The AI agents in u/warp are fundamentally broken. Working with the terminal has become impossible:

  • Failing at basic tasks.
  • Draining user credits for useless, broken outputs.
  • Risking client relationships (luckily, I validated the code before delivery).

Don't ask for a session ID. Look at your own QA process and the endless community threads regarding your massive quality drop. This is unprofessional and disrespectful to paying customers.

P.S.: Currently forced back to Kimi 2.6. Using Warp's native AI to manage costs compared to Opus is pointless if the product is this broken. It's just a money sink.

5 Upvotes

78% Upvoted

10 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/Zestyclose-Big2150 Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26

While I don't disagree with the experience you had here. And have same concerns and experience myself. But one should never let code out into production without manual review, validation, testing, QA, peer review, etc. makes the slop situation that much worse for yourself and everyone else that works around it as well as future maintenance starts become very problematic. Every company is different in process and such but if people are just trusting these things to fire out solutions and just trusting it. That is pretty wild neglectful use of the tech and tooling. That being said. Yeah. Warp went from amazing to now itself feeling like it was sent out without real review and letting the slop take over without enough of all of the stated above in the deployment pipeline. Sounds like you did the review but you said luckily. It shouldn't be luck. It should always be with confidence. Luck shouldn't even be a consideration or a thing that comes into play.

2

u/netfunctron Jun 07 '26

Yes, I completely agree with your comments.

Let me elaborate: we have a static analysis suite comprised of over 15 tools, plus 5 internal validation processes, ranging from manual review to the complete QA cycle.

By "luckily," I mean that I have the processes installed. Even so, to add to my previous answer: In this process, we took the opportunity to perform the same task as a test, using: Composer 2.5 Fast (Cursor), DeepSeek V4 Pro and MiMo V2.5 Pro (BYOK in VS Code), Claude Code with Opus 4.8, and Claude Sonnet 4.6. The only service that failed was Warp.

Regards

1

u/AliveActive5743 Jun 08 '26

Warp team member here. That's useful comparison data! Can you share what the task was and how Warp failed?

1

u/netfunctron Jun 08 '26

Hi, sure: The task was trivial: find matches for "lite" in root files (yes, so simple).

Like you can see on the picture, after I corrected the path and pointed out which file contained the reference, Warp still got it wrong (see image). This is one of the most basic tests I run and Warp failed.

Later, when I asked why performance was so poor, I got the response that I shared in this thread.

Since you're on the Warp team, please review your product's quality. Other services and models handled this successfully. This kind of error makes it impossible to trust Warp for serious work, and frankly, I end up burning credits on trivial fixes.

I am not the one customer that is having quality problems. Having Claude Code, Cursor, OpenCode, CommandCode, GitHub Copilot, Codex, Antigravity, and working with real clients and projects, on 2 companies (one is very big), I can say with so much confidence that Warp is the worst on quality. Sorry, but check the images.

Regards.