Will Generative UI Replace Frontend Developers or Just Redefine Them?

Meta Description: Generative UI promises to reshape frontend development. We explore how AI-generated interfaces (GenUI) impact the role of frontend developers - whether these dynamic, LLM-driven UIs will replace human engineers or simply redefine their work in an AI-native software era.

Generative UI - short for Generative User Interface - is an emerging paradigm where AI systems like large language models (LLMs) don’t just power app logic, but actually generate the user interface in real time (Bridging The Gap). Instead of developers hand-coding every screen, the interface can assemble itself dynamically based on the user’s needs and context. This forward-thinking approach is transforming how we build software frontends. But a pressing question has arisen alongside GenUI’s rise: will generative UIs and AI-driven tools replace frontend developers, or simply redefine their role?

This post takes a thoughtful, engineering-centric look at what Generative UI means for frontend developers, UX engineers, and product teams. We’ll compare traditional frontend work with GenUI-powered development, using real-world examples of LLM UI components, AI dashboard builders, and AI UX tools to illustrate the changes. We’ll also discuss building UIs with AI (how prompt-based UI generation works under the hood), and examine concepts like real-time adaptive UIs, LLM-driven product interfaces, and frontends for AI agents. Throughout, we’ll consider the human element: which parts of UI creation can be automated with an AI frontend API and where human creativity, oversight, and empathy remain irreplaceable.

In the end, you’ll see that Generative UI is less about removing the frontend developer and more about frontend automation and augmentation - changing the nature of the work rather than eliminating it. Just as past innovations (from WYSIWYG editors to code frameworks) changed how devs work but didn’t make them obsolete, GenUI is poised to redefine frontend roles. Let’s dive into why.

Traditional Frontend vs. Generative UI Development
To understand the impact, we must first grasp how generative UIs differ from traditional frontends. In a traditional web or app project, developers craft static layouts and define user flows in advance. The interface is largely fixed - every user sees the same screens and components unless a human coded variants or personalization rules. Even in “dynamic” apps, developers pre-build all possible UI states and use conditions to toggle them. This approach assumes relatively stable requirements and uses a one-size-fits-all design for all users.

Generative UI flips this model by making the interface adaptive and AI-driven. Instead of pre-defining every button, form, or chart, developers integrate an AI model that can create UI elements on the fly. According to the Nielsen Norman Group, a Generative UI is “a user interface that is dynamically generated in real time by artificial intelligence to provide an experience customized to fit the user’s needs and context” (Moran & Gibbons, 2024). In practical terms, a generative UI means the app’s layout, components, and workflow can morph in real time for each user (Bridging The Gap). The interface you see is assembled by an AI agent based on your request, preferences, past behavior, or current context, rather than a static design. It’s like having a digital UX designer present every time you use the app, tailoring the experience just for you (Bridging The Gap).

For example, imagine a traditional analytics dashboard with ten charts and controls. Every user gets the same ten charts, whether or not they’re relevant. In a generative UI world, that dashboard could reconfigure itself intelligently. If the AI knows you care most about sales by region, it might highlight a map and sales chart up front and tuck less relevant charts behind tabs. If you never use a certain filter, the interface might hide it for you while emphasizing tools you do use (Bridging The Gap). The software adjusts to you, rather than you adapting to the software. This level of personalization goes far beyond theme settings or basic user preferences - it’s a real-time adaptive UI driven by AI understanding.

Another key difference is when the UI is generated. Some recent AI design tools can create UI mockups or code from a text prompt - for instance, “generate a sign-up form with Google login.” These prompt-to-UI or AI UX tools (e.g. Galileo AI or Uizard) operate before an app is live, assisting humans in designing a static UI. Generative UI, by contrast, refers to the UI being created during runtime, continually updated by the AI as the user interacts (Bridging The Gap). One Thesys blog article explained it well: prompt-to-UI helps developers get an initial interface faster, whereas Generative UI “revolutionizes how people experience software by letting the interface shape itself in real time, uniquely for them” (Generative UI vs Prompt to UI vs Prompt to Design). In short, using AI to help build an interface is very different from an interface that builds itself via AI once the product is in use (Bridging The Gap).

Real-World Examples of LLM-Driven Interfaces
These concepts might sound abstract, so let’s look at concrete examples of AI-native software using Generative UI. A common scenario is an AI dashboard builder within a chat interface. Imagine you have a chatbot in a business intelligence app. Traditionally, no matter what you ask the chatbot, it would reply with text (or maybe a static table). With GenUI, the chatbot can respond with actual interactive UI components. Ask “Show me the top 5 products by growth this month,” and the AI could generate a bar chart component or a sortable table with those results, right inside the conversation. If you then ask to filter to a specific region, the AI could conjure a dropdown or additional controls on the fly. In effect, the AI acts like an on-demand UI designer, turning your requests into fully-fledged visualizations or input widgets. The chatbot stops being just a text box - it becomes a dynamic UI with LLM behind the scenes, capable of building new charts, forms, and panels as needed.

This real-time generation isn’t just for chatbots. Any application where user needs can vary widely is a candidate for GenUI. Consider an AI-driven project management tool. A project manager might ask an AI assistant inside the app, “Summarize this week’s progress and show any task delays.” A generative UI could create a custom dashboard panel: a textual summary alongside a timeline or table of delayed tasks, assembled on demand. Another user might ask, “Display the team’s workload for next month,” and get a different interface - perhaps a calendar view or an interactive workload graph. LLM UI components (charts, timelines, forms, maps, etc.) can be inserted as appropriate to best present the answer. Two users could interact with the same system and see entirely different UIs tailored to their queries and preferences. This is the essence of an LLM-driven product interface - the UI becomes an extension of the model’s reasoning, not a hardcoded shell (Bridging The Gap).

We already see early signs of this in AI-powered software. Some no-code and low-code platforms are adding AI features to generate interface elements from descriptions. There are libraries for developers (like llm-ui or Thesys’s open-source Crayon library) that provide components optimized for AI control - e.g. a chat panel that streams model output token-by-token and can include action buttons, or a form generator that an AI can populate on the fly (Bridging The Gap). This is paving the way for mainstream adoption of GenUI patterns. Think of it like how early web frameworks provided ready-made components for building interfaces, except now those components can be assembled by an AI agent as needed.

Another emerging example is the concept of a frontend for AI agents. Many companies are exploring AI agents that can perform tasks for users (scheduling meetings, doing research, controlling smart devices, etc.). However, giving users insight into what an AI agent is doing, or letting them steer the agent, requires a flexible UI - a challenge cited as a major hurdle in enterprise AI adoption (Bridging The Gap). Generative UI offers a solution: the agent can expose its thought process or options via UI elements it generates. If an AI agent needs confirmation to proceed with deleting an email, it could generate a confirmation dialog in the UI at that moment. If it completes a multi-step task, it might display a timeline or checklist of what it did. In other words, GenUI can serve as the LLM agent user interface, providing real-time, contextual windows into the agent’s operations and allowing the user to interact or intervene when needed. This kind of adaptive, context-driven interface goes well beyond static chatbot logs, making AI agents more transparent and user-friendly.

Building UIs with AI: How Prompt-Based Generation Works
So, how do developers actually build a UI that generates itself from AI outputs? Generative UI systems typically rely on a few core ingredients working together (Bridging The Gap):

• 1. An AI model (LLM) with UI-aware capabilities: The AI (often a large language model) is not just answering user questions with text, but is instructed or fine-tuned to output structured UI instructions. For example, instead of replying “Sales are up 5%,” the model might output a JSON or DSL (domain-specific language) snippet saying: “Create a line chart showing monthly sales; highlight the 5% increase.” The model essentially decides what UI component is needed (chart, form, table, etc.) and how to configure it, based on the user’s intent. This requires the model to have a format or “API” for expressing UI elements, often provided via system prompts or specialized training.
• 2. A library of UI components: On the frontend side, developers maintain a palette of pre-built components (charts, tables, buttons, text inputs, maps, dialogs, etc.) that the AI can use. The AI doesn’t literally draw pixels from scratch - it selects from these building blocks. For instance, if the AI outputs an instruction for a bar chart, it corresponds to a chart component in the library. These components are designed to be controlled by parameters (like data, labels, style options). Ensuring the AI can work with them might involve exposing functions or an API that the model can invoke (e.g., a function createChart(data, x, y) that the model can call via tool usage). This component library approach keeps the AI-generated UI consistent with the app’s look and feel (since components follow the design system), and ensures we’re not letting the AI freestyle arbitrary HTML (which could be risky). In short, developers set the LEGO pieces out for the AI to assemble.
• 3. A rendering engine or runtime: Finally, there’s a layer in the application that takes the AI’s structured output and renders the actual interface for the user. In a web app, this might be a JavaScript/React component that listens for the AI’s responses. If it receives JSON telling it to display a certain UI, it maps that to real UI elements on screen. Essentially, this is like a mini front-end interpreter that turns the AI’s “UI script” into an interactive interface in real time (Bridging The Gap). Modern implementations use frameworks or SDKs that handle this mapping. For example, Thesys’s C1 React SDK takes the JSON from the AI and automatically mounts the corresponding React components on the page (Bridging The Gap). This is what makes the experience seamless for the end user - the AI’s decisions instantly become UI elements they can see and click on.

Putting it together, to build UI with AI, developers write prompts and integrate an API rather than coding static screens. You describe what you want the user to see or achieve in a prompt, send it to an AI model via an API call, and get back a structured response describing the UI to render . The heavy lifting of figuring out layout and creating components is handled by the AI - a process we can rightly call frontend automation. Much of the tedious boilerplate of HTML/CSS/JS is replaced by an AI-driven process (Bridging The Gap).

For instance, consider building an analytics app. Traditionally, you might create dozens of pre-built dashboards or chart pages for different metrics. With a generative UI approach, you could instead create an AI dashboard builder: users simply ask questions or give requests (like “Compare revenue and profitability for Q1 vs Q2”), and the AI generates the appropriate UI to answer them (maybe a couple of charts and a brief text analysis). A developer at Thesys described how using their C1 API enabled exactly this - instead of hardcoding every possible dashboard, the team let users generate custom views on the fly (Bridging The Gap). The front-end code didn’t need a screen explicitly designed for “Q1 vs Q2 revenue,” because the generative UI assembled it dynamically when asked. This kind of build UI with AI approach accelerates development and makes the product far more flexible.

AI UX Tools vs. Generative UI
It’s worth noting the distinction between AI-assisted design tools and true runtime generative UIs, as they imply different impacts on developers. Many designers and developers today use AI tools to speed up parts of their workflow - for example, using GitHub Copilot to generate code snippets, or Figma’s AI features to produce design variations. These tools certainly blur the line between coding and AI generation, but they still output static artifacts that a human then refines. For instance, an AI might generate the React code for a form, but a developer will integrate and polish it.

Generative UI goes a step further: it hands part of the live UI creation to the AI agent within the product. It’s not just aiding the developer during development; it’s acting as a co-developer during runtime. Prompt-to-design and prompt-to-UI tools target the earlier stages of product building (helping designers and developers prototype faster) (Bridging The Gap). In contrast, Generative UI “flips the audience to the end user” (Bridging The Gap) - the AI is working for the end user’s benefit by tailoring the interface in real time. Both are valuable, but their outcomes differ: one produces a design or code for developers to use, the other produces an interactive experience for users directly.

What does this mean for frontend developers? Primarily, it means that developers will shift from being the sole creators of interfaces to being curators and orchestrators of AI-generated interfaces. In the prompt-to-UI scenario, a frontend dev might spend time prompting an AI to generate some boilerplate code, then debugging and adjusting it. In the GenUI scenario, the frontend dev spends time defining the component toolkit, writing the prompts (or system instructions) that guide the AI’s UI decisions, and putting guardrails in place. The actual assembly of UI for each scenario or user query is left to the AI during app usage.

Will Generative UI Replace Frontend Developers?
Now to the big question - if AI can generate interfaces on the fly, do we still need frontend developers at all? History and current evidence suggest that AI won’t replace frontend developers, but it will redefine their role. Generative UI represents a powerful new set of tools and abstractions, but human developers remain crucial for many reasons:

• Creative Problem-Solving and UX Strategy: Building a great user experience involves empathy, creativity, and a deep understanding of user needs. AI, for all its prowess, lacks true understanding of context, nuance, and human emotions. It can generate a UI following patterns, but it doesn’t inherently know why a design choice is good or bad for users. Human frontend engineers (and designers) provide the vision for what the experience should achieve. They set the overall UX strategy and information architecture that the AI follows. An AI might propose a layout, but a human will decide if that layout genuinely makes sense for onboarding a new user, or if it aligns with the product’s brand identity. As one industry expert noted, AI lacks empathy and cannot feel a user’s frustration or delight - only a human developer or designer can ensure the interface truly works for real people in various circumstances. In short, humans still define the problems to solve; AI helps solve them faster.
• Oversight of Performance and Accessibility: Frontend development isn’t just about getting something on screen - it’s about making sure it’s fast, accessible, and polished. AI-generated code might be functional, but it often does not optimize for performance or accessibility unless explicitly guided. A skilled frontend developer is needed to enforce performance best practices (optimized assets, efficient rendering, smooth interactions). Likewise, accessibility requires careful attention: AI may unknowingly produce components that lack proper alt text, keyboard navigation, or ARIA labels, because much of its training data doesn’t prioritize these concerns. Human developers and QA specialists must review and refine the AI’s output to ensure it meets standards and works for all users. Rather than writing every line of UI code, their effort shifts to reviewing AI-generated UIs for quality - akin to how a copy editor reviews content written by an AI for correctness and tone.
• Maintaining Consistency & Brand: Enterprises have design systems and brand guidelines that need consistent application. Developers will still craft the core components and styles that represent the brand. Generative UI works within that sandbox - it assembles UIs from those approved components. If the AI starts to produce something off-brand or inconsistent, it’s up to developers to adjust the prompts or constraints. In practice, teams set guardrails so the generative UI doesn’t, say, use the wrong font or an inappropriate color for a warning message (Bridging The Gap). Developers essentially become conductors, ensuring the AI plays the UI “music” in tune with the overall design language.
• Complex Logic and Integration: Not all front-end work is visual. Frontend developers also handle client-side logic, state management, integration with backends/APIs, and ensuring security on the client side. Generative UI primarily tackles the presentation layer - it doesn’t eliminate the need to write logic that decides when to call the AI, how to handle the data it returns, how to manage user authentication, etc. Developers will still build the surrounding app structure in which the AI operates. For example, if an AI-generated form needs to submit data, a developer defines how that submission is processed and how errors are handled. In fact, developers might need to work more closely with backend engineers to ensure the AI has the data it needs to generate useful UIs (feeding it metadata or hooking into services).
• Iterating and Improving: AI might deliver a first draft of a UI in seconds, but as any dev knows, first drafts aren’t final. Human judgment is needed to iterate on that output. Developers will test AI-generated interfaces with real users, gather feedback, and refine the system’s behavior accordingly. This could mean adjusting the AI’s instructions if users find the generated UI confusing, or adding new components to the library if the AI is limited by the current toolkit. In essence, developers become AI UX coaches - monitoring how the AI performs in creating UIs and teaching it to do better over time. This is a new responsibility that didn’t exist in traditional frontend work.

Given these points, most experts see GenUI as a copilot, not a replacement for frontend developers. It automates the routine assembly of UI (the tedious parts of laying out forms, lists, buttons repeatedly), allowing developers to focus on higher-level aspects. In fact, a Thesys article described this setup as “a co-pilot for the frontend: the AI handles routine UI decisions and builds out interfaces in milliseconds, while human developers focus on overall UX strategy, custom component crafting, and ensuring quality and consistency” (Bridging The Gap). Instead of being threatened by automation, many frontend engineers welcome it - nobody enjoys reinventing the wheel for the hundredth modal dialog or fixing CSS for every screen size. By offloading repetitive UI coding to an AI, developers can tackle the more interesting problems and deliver value faster.

We’ve seen parallels to this with tools like GitHub Copilot in coding: studies show AI assistance boosts developer productivity by handling boilerplate, but developers remain in control and are still needed to architect solutions. Likewise, generative UI means frontend engineers will spend less time fighting CSS and more time crafting user journeys and robust client logic. This can make the job more rewarding and creative.

Indeed, companies adopting GenUI report faster development cycles and fewer frontend bottlenecks. Gartner predicts that by 2026, teams using AI-assisted design/development will reduce UI development costs by 30% and increase design output by 50% (Gartner, 2024) (Bridging The Gap)". That doesn’t come from replacing developers - it comes from empowering smaller teams to do more. A generative UI platform might allow a startup to deliver a polished, LLM-driven product interface without hiring a large front-end team, but those developers still play a pivotal role in guiding the AI and refining the results.

Evolving the Frontend Role
If Generative UI takes off, we can expect new skill sets and roles to emerge in frontend engineering. Here are a few ways frontend roles may be redefined:

• Prompt Engineering for UI: Crafting the right prompts (or system instructions) for the AI becomes a crucial skill. Just as some developers now specialize in prompt engineering to get useful outputs from LLMs for content or code, frontend devs will learn how to “ask” the AI for the best interface. This might involve describing UI intentions in a structured way, providing examples for the AI to follow, or tuning the model’s parameters. The frontend dev essentially speaks both the language of design and the language of the AI.
• AI Orchestration and State Management: Generative UIs often require maintaining conversation or context state between the user and the AI, so that the UI can evolve over multiple interactions. Frontend developers will design how this context is stored and passed. They’ll also decide when to invoke the AI and how often to update the UI. Too frequent and it could confuse users; too infrequent and it loses reactivity. Balancing this is a new kind of UX choreography that developers will handle.
• Component Library Curation: Since the AI relies on a library of components, someone needs to build and maintain that library. Frontend devs will still write plenty of traditional code here - creating flexible, well-documented components that the AI can use. In a sense, instead of assembling UI for every feature, developers build the toolbox and let the AI assemble the UI. This shifts the focus to API design for UI components (making sure each component is intuitive for the AI to use and aligned with design guidelines).
• Quality Control and AI Behavior Tuning: Frontend teams might include roles akin to an “AI UX tester” - someone who continually tests the generative UI outputs for quality, much like a QA tester but for AI behavior. They might catch cases where the AI chooses a suboptimal layout or misses a required element. The team can then refine the system (for example, adding a rule that “always include a title on generated charts” if the AI forgot one). Continuous improvement of the AI’s UI generation logic will be part of the development lifecycle.
• Collaborating with Designers in New Ways: Designers and frontend devs will collaborate closely to guide the AI. A designer might define the style and acceptable layouts, while the developer encodes those as constraints or examples for the AI. The line between design and implementation could blur: some design work might be done in terms of writing sample prompts to test how the AI lays things out, then adjusting the component styling accordingly. Frontend developers who can wear a bit of a UX designer hat (thinking in terms of desired end-user experience, not just code) will thrive in this environment.

It’s an exciting evolution. Far from making the role obsolete, Generative UI could make frontend development more impactful. Developers will have the superpower to instantly produce interfaces for complex tasks (via the AI), which means they can focus on bigger-picture thinking and fine-tuning rather than starting every screen from scratch. As one frontend lead put it, “the most successful projects are those where technology enhances human creativity rather than attempting to replace it” (Mosby, 2023). Generative UI embodies that idea - the AI enhances what developers can do, but the spark of creativity and empathy that drives great user experiences remains human.

Challenges and Considerations
While painting a bright future, we should also acknowledge challenges that come with GenUI. Dynamic, AI-driven interfaces raise valid concerns and will require human oversight to get right:

• Usability and Consistency: A UI that changes for every user or every query can become confusing if not managed carefully. Users still need some predictability. It’s up to designers and devs to ensure the AI-generated UI follows usability heuristics. For example, navigation patterns shouldn’t shift so much that users lose their bearings. Striking the right balance between adaptation and consistency is tricky - too rigid and you lose the benefit of personalization, too fluid and you risk a disorienting experience. Human judgment is needed to set those boundaries (e.g. maybe the overall menu structure stays constant, while content panels adapt).
• Quality of AI Decisions: The AI might occasionally choose an odd way to present information - perhaps using an inappropriate chart type or leaving out context a user needs. These are essentially “AI UX bugs.” Developers will need to catch and correct these by improving the model or adding rules. Unlike a coded UI where a bug is fixed in code, here you may fix it by tweaking the AI’s training data or constraints. This is new territory for many teams.
• Bias and Privacy: An AI that personalizes interfaces might inadvertently reflect biases (e.g. showing different options to users in a way that could be unfair or non-transparent). Also, to personalize, it may use user data and context that raise privacy questions. Frontend developers and product owners will have to incorporate ethical guidelines into how the AI uses data for UI generation. For instance, ensuring the AI’s adaptations don’t inadvertently leak sensitive info on screen, and that they comply with regulations.
• Performance Overhead: Involving an AI model in UI rendering could introduce latency if not optimized. Developers must architect systems such that small UI changes don’t always require a slow model call. Techniques like caching recent AI outputs, using efficient on-device models for minor changes, or pre-fetching likely components can help. Essentially, performance engineering remains crucial - the AI’s brains might be fast, but network and rendering still need to be tuned by human engineers for a snappy UI.
• Learning Curve and Tooling: Embracing GenUI means investing in new tooling and training. Teams will need to adopt frameworks that support AI-driven UIs (such as new libraries or SDKs). Developers have to get comfortable debugging AI outputs, which is a different skill than debugging JavaScript. There may be fewer established best practices initially, so developers will be trailblazing. Companies like Thesys are working on documentation and examples to ease this (e.g. guides on how to format prompts for UI generation, how to handle multi-turn interactions, etc.) (Bridging The Gap). Over time, we expect the ecosystem to mature, but early on, developers will play a key role in defining those best practices.

Despite these challenges, the trajectory is clear: interfaces are becoming more contextual, outcome-oriented, and adaptive. Generative UI aligns with a broader vision of software that meets users where they are, rather than making users learn the software. Achieving that vision will require both smart AI and smart humans working in concert.

Conclusion
Generative UI is a paradigm shift in how we think about user interfaces - from static designs to living, AI-crafted experiences. It brings tremendous potential to improve user engagement, personalization, and development speed. However, it’s not a magic button that removes humans from the equation. Instead, it redefines how frontend developers add value. Much of the rote work of building interfaces can be automated, freeing developers to concentrate on higher-order tasks: defining the user experience, ensuring quality, and orchestrating the AI “assistant” that now helps build the UI.

In practice, frontend developers won’t be replaced by Generative UI - they’ll be augmented by it. The role will likely feel more like leading an orchestra (with the AI as a very capable but not infallible musician) rather than playing every instrument oneself. Those developers who learn to leverage AI tools and AI frontend APIs will be able to create richer applications faster than ever before. And those who bring strong UX intuition will ensure that these AI-generated interfaces truly serve users effectively.

As we’ve explored, generative UIs still need the human touch for vision, empathy, and fine-tuning. The question is not humans or AI, but humans and AI building better frontends together. Rather than fearing replacement, frontend engineers can embrace this technology to supercharge their productivity and focus on what matters most - crafting experiences that delight and empower users.

In the end, Generative UI changes the game for frontend development. It promises software that is intelligent on the inside and smart on the outside, adapting to each user. The frontend developer’s mission then evolves: turning raw AI power into intuitive interfaces, acting as the bridge between powerful models and human users. That mission is as critical as ever, even if the tools to accomplish it have advanced.

At Thesys, we’re excited about this future. Thesys is a company building AI frontend infrastructure, and our own Generative UI API - C1 by Thesys - embodies this new approach. C1 is the world’s first GenUI API, enabling developers to turn LLM outputs into live, interactive interfaces in real time. It’s an AI frontend API that lets you plug an LLM into your app’s UI layer, so the AI can generate dashboards, forms, and more on the fly. We invite you to explore how Thesys is helping teams build UIs with AI, allowing AI tools to generate live, dynamic UIs directly from LLM outputs. To learn more about Generative UI and see C1 in action, visit our website thesys.dev and check out the docs at docs.thesys.dev. The era of AI-driven frontends is just beginning - and with the right infrastructure, your team can harness GenUI to build the next generation of adaptive, LLM-driven product interfaces.

References:

• Moran, Kate, and Sarah Gibbons. “Generative UI and Outcome-Oriented Design.” Nielsen Norman Group, 22 Mar. 2024.
• Krill, Paul. “Thesys Introduces C1 to Launch the Era of Generative UI.” InfoWorld, 25 Apr. 2025.
• Schneider, Jeremy, et al. “Navigating the Generative AI Disruption in Software.” McKinsey & Company, 5 June 2024.
• Firestorm Consulting. "Rise of AI Agents" Firestorm Consulting, 14 June 2025.
• Boston Consulting Group (BCG). AI Adoption in 2024: 74% of Companies Struggle to Achieve and Scale Value. Press Release, 24 Oct. 2024.
• Gartner (via Incerro.ai). “The Future of AI-Generated User Interfaces.” Incerro Insights, 2023.
• Mosby, Andrew. “Can AI Replace UI Developers?” Viget, 2023.
• Firestorm Consulting. "Stop Patching, Start Building: Tech’s Future Runs on LLMs" Firestorm Consulting, 14 June 2025.
• Efimova, Darya. “AI for Frontend Development: Changing the Old Ways with GenAI.” EPAM Startups & SMBs Blog, 14 Aug. 2024.
• Bridging the Gap Between AI and UI: The Case for Generative Frontends (Thesys blog, 2025).
• Generative UI vs Prompt to UI vs Prompt to Design (Thesys blog, 2025).

FAQ

What is Generative UI?
Generative UI (GenUI) is a user interface that is dynamically generated by AI in real time, rather than pre-built by developers. In a generative UI, an AI (often an LLM) decides what components or layout to show based on the user’s request, context, and preferences. This results in AI-driven interfaces that adapt to each user’s needs on the fly - for example, showing different charts or forms to different users depending on what they ask for. It’s a step beyond traditional static UIs, making the software interface intelligent and personalized. Generative UIs are built by integrating an AI frontend system that can output UI components (like charts, tables, buttons, etc.) as part of its responses, effectively allowing the AI to “build” the interface as the user interactsthesys.devthesys.dev.

How is Generative UI different from traditional frontend development?
Traditional frontend development involves designers and developers crafting a fixed UI/UX ahead of time - every screen, menu, and form is hand-coded and doesn’t change unless a human redesigns it. GenUI, on the other hand, makes the interface flexible and context-driven. The UI can change at runtime depending on the situation. For example, a static app might always show the same dashboard to every user, whereas a generative UI app could show a custom dashboard to each user (highlighting the info that user cares about most). Technically, traditional devs write all the UI code, while generative UIs rely on an AI to write part of the UI layout in response to prompts. This means frontend developers move from explicitly coding every detail to setting up the AI system (component library, rules, prompts) that creates the UI. The result is more personalized, dynamic UI with LLM logic behind it, instead of one-size-fits-all screens.

Will Generative UI replace frontend developers?
No - instead of replacing frontend developers, Generative UI redefines their role. AI can automate routine parts of UI creation (like generating forms, buttons, and basic layouts), but human developers are still essential for many tasks. Frontend devs are needed to design the overall user experience, ensure performance and accessibility, maintain consistency with brand/design guidelines, and handle complex application logic. AI lacks the human intuition for usability, context, and creativity. In practice, GenUI serves as a co-pilot: it handles repetitive UI assembly, while developers guide the AI, refine its outputs, and focus on higher-level design and logic. Much like how IDEs or code generators help but don’t replace coders, AI UI tools help frontenders work faster. Companies adopting GenUI have reported increased productivity (faster development cycles) but they still employ developers - those developers just spend more time orchestrating the AI and polishing the results, rather than coding every pixel by hand. In short, generative UI augments frontend developers, it doesn’t eliminate them.

How do you build a UI with AI (prompt-based UI generation)?
To build UI with AI, developers use a prompt-based approach: they send a description or request to an AI model, and the model returns a structured answer that includes UI elements. For example, a prompt might be “Create a form for user signup with email and Google login options.” A suitably prepared LLM will interpret that and output something like a JSON or code snippet describing a signup form (with fields, a Google login button, etc.). The application’s front-end has a renderer (or uses an SDK) that takes this AI output and actually generates the interface live for the user. This is essentially how to generate UI from a prompt - the prompt is the instruction, and the AI’s response is treated as “UI code.” Developers set up the system by defining what component types the AI can use and ensuring the model knows the format. Modern GenUI platforms, such as Thesys’s C1 API, streamline this by offering a ready-made AI that you send prompts to and get UI back. You can think of it as an API call where the request is your UI intent and the response is a chunk of interface you can render. This approach allows on-the-fly UI creation without manual coding each time.

What are LLM UI components?
LLM UI components are UI building blocks designed to be controlled by a Large Language Model. They are the pieces (charts, tables, text boxes, buttons, etc.) that an AI can assemble to create a user interface. Unlike normal UI components which are only placed by developers, LLM UI components are configured via AI outputs. For instance, a developer might provide an LLM with a tool or function for “createChart(data, x-axis, y-axis)” - that corresponds to a chart component in the frontend. When the LLM decides a chart is needed, it uses that component. These components often come with an API or schema the AI understands. They may also be designed to accommodate streaming content (for example, gradually filling in a table as data comes, or updating in response to user input via the AI). In short, LLM UI components are the LEGO pieces of a generative interface, and the LLM is the one putting those pieces together during the user session. Developers create and register these components, and ensure the LLM knows how to invoke them properly.

What is an AI frontend API?
An AI frontend API (sometimes called a generative UI API) is a service or library that allows developers to integrate generative UI capabilities into their applications. It provides the interface between an AI model and the frontend code. For example, Thesys’s C1 API is an AI frontend API - developers send user prompts (and context) to C1, and C1 responds with JSON that describes UI components to render. Under the hood, the API uses an AI model that has been tailored for UI generation tasks. By using such an API, developers don’t have to train their own model from scratch; they can plug it in and get immediate GenUI functionality. Essentially, an AI frontend API is what enables your app to have an AI as part of the frontend, generating interface elements on demand. It usually comes with associated SDKs or runtime libraries to actually render the UIs it generates. This simplifies the work for developers - you focus on when/what to prompt for, and the API handles translating that into a live UI.