AIP-C01 practice question: Developer productivity and troubleshooting tools (Kiro, Amazon Q Developer, Logs Insights)
Implementation and Integration A free question from our original AIP-C01 practice exam. Try it, then open the answer to see why each option is right or wrong.
A five-person startup is building a feature that extracts clauses from contracts with a model on Amazon Bedrock. The developers describe changes in chat, and the code has drifted from what the product owner agreed to. Reviewers now ask for written acceptance criteria before any code is merged.
The team needs three things. Requirements with acceptance criteria and a task list should be reviewed before code is written, the team's coding standards should apply in every developer's AI coding session, and the work should happen in Kiro, the team's chosen IDE.
Which TWO actions meet these requirements? (Choose two.)
Choose two answers.
AA. Use Kiro's spec-driven workflow, writing requirements with acceptance criteria, approving a design document, and then running the task list that is generated from the approved spec.
BB. Paste each product request into a general chat assistant, ask it to write the whole feature in one prompt, and review the generated diff after the code is written.
CC. Keep the requirements in a shared wiki page and link it in each pull request description, while every developer works from their own unshared prompt history.
DD. Store the team's coding standards as steering files in the repository in Kiro, so that every developer's Kiro session loads the same conventions automatically.
EE. Add a CloudWatch Logs Insights query that counts the merged pull requests each week, so that the team can see how many changes were reviewed.
Show the answer and explanation
Answers: A, D
A. Right: Kiro's spec workflow puts the requirements, design and tasks in files that the team reviews before coding starts. Each task traces back to an acceptance criterion, which meets the review requirement. Learn more: Kiro documentation (opens in a new tab)
B. Wrong: Reviewing after the code is written is the drift the team wants to stop. A single prompt also leaves no agreed requirements or task list for reviewers to approve first.
C. Wrong: A wiki link helps reviewers, but the requirements are not reviewed before coding, and the standards depend on each developer's own prompts. Both requirements are missed.
D. Right: Steering files live with the code, and Kiro loads them into every session in the project. This applies the same standards to each developer's work without anyone repeating them in prompts. Learn more: Kiro documentation (opens in a new tab)
E. Wrong: A query reports on merges after they happen and does not set requirements or standards for the work. It does not meet either the review-before-coding or the standards requirement.
Explanation
Kiro's spec workflow makes the team review requirements, design and tasks before code is written, with acceptance criteria that tie back to each task. Steering files in the repository give every developer's Kiro session the same standards. Chat prompts, wiki links and log queries leave the review or the standards requirement unmet.
Want more on Developer productivity and troubleshooting tools (Kiro, Amazon Q Developer, Logs Insights)? The 5 full-length practice sets have 7 more Developer productivity and troubleshooting tools (Kiro, Amazon Q Developer, Logs Insights) questions, 375 in all, none of them in the free exam. One payment of $14.99, no subscription. See the practice sets →