Absolutely, and this is true to handwritten code as well. This is why code review, tests, constraints, and putting effort into the critical pieces of software is paramount to success.

I also would argue that in this case, the end result wasn't good but rather perceived good. It was good enough to pass a smoke test, but not an integration test, and end-to-end test, a runtime edge case, etc.

All of software development lifecycle should still apply and be relevant here, the tool just changes the rate at how it gets written and it is tempting to move faster and continue skipping other steps. Especially so in greenfield work as a solo founder with limited time.

I think at the end of the day, a good metric is your "give a shit quotient". How much do you give a shit about what you are doing is likely the most important thing into how it is going to perform.