diff --git a/src/routes/posts/the_case_for_an_ai_header.mdx b/src/routes/posts/the_case_for_an_ai_header.mdx
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b5197a8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/routes/posts/the_case_for_an_ai_header.mdx
@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+---
+meta:
+  title:  The case for adding a 'this file was generated by AI' header
+  description: It helps not gaslight anyone reading the code 
+  dateCreated: 2026-07-01
+
+tags: 
+  - "ai"
+  - "ai_prompts"
+
+---
+
+
+I have recently taken to adding this instruction to my coding agent prompts: 
+
+````md
+## Agent Instructions
+
+When creating a new file add the following header to the top of it
+
+```typescript
+/**
+ * 🤖
+ * This file was created with AI
+ *
+ * Harness: (harness name)
+ * Model: (model name)
+ * Supervising engineer: (get this from git config)
+ *
+ * Level of human supervision: None (None is the default, but if in an interactive session with a human you can ask to elevate it)
+ *
+ *
+ */
+
+```
+
+Exceptions:
+- JSON files and anything else that would break with the presence of the header
+````
+
+
+This is a simple enough prompt that is hard to get wrong.
+
+## But why?
+
+Mostly to improve signal when working in teams.  
+
+If a colleague creates a pull request with dozens of files of pristine, comprehensively tested code, this immediately triggers a 'this looks AI generated to me' kind of thought.
+
+_Which is fine_. 
+
+But:
+
+- If we're embracing AI, then let's not be embarrassed about it.
+- It makes it really clear to your colleagues which bits are AI generated. It's _signal_ we're not pretending we wrote this ourselves.
+- It makes us as a human consider 'how have we sense checked this' or 'how are we assessing correctness'? 
+
+
+## What's wrong with it 
+
+- You could argue that if we have configured our AI to be committing, and it has the `Co-Authored-By:` note in the commit message, that this suffices to understand where the code came from, but:
+  - That commit message will be lost if squash merging
+  - Some times commits are made manually
+  - Commit messages are not nearly as readily apparent as code
+
+- It might be a good source of signal for the first time the file is created, but as the file is modified, by human or otherwise, the header becomes a less clear source of signal, but:   
+  - A lot of AI generated code _is_ going to be this 'one and done' style code
+  - That's where diving in to the commit history for the file can help
+
+- Communicating just what the level of human overview/intent is, is messy
+  - Say you did a TDD approach where you carefully supervised the AI in creating test cases, but the actual code, in 10 different files, was purely AI generated - how exactly do you communicate this?
+      - Copy paste that message to each header file?
+      - Have a `HUMANS.md` file in the folder that explains it?
+      - Just explain it once in the test file, and hope that the future reader knows to look there?
+