Personally, the more time I spend working with coding agents the least worried I am for my career. Getting the best results out of them is really hard. They amplify existing skills and experience, so the more experience you have the better.
I wonder why there is such a mad dash to trump up the capabilities of coding agents. And why such loose terminology and lack of rigor? I thought programmers were supposed to be rational people (har har!)
I have a theory: if they were good at writing automated tests, they would have been developers instead of QA engineers.
Not saying that there aren't any high quality QA engineers, I worked with some. But LLM's raised the bar in a way that most QA engineers can't reach.
In my limited experience they write test cases, test each story, do regression test, verify bugs from customers. All by hand.
At my current job I don't want to miss them.
The best QA people I've worked with didn't write much code at all. You'd give them a new system and they'd find all of the bugs, testing obscure edge-cases that you'd never thought of.