For certain kinds of simple applications, you can generate something usable this way. However, it often falls apart completely as you scale to more complex applications, and in any case, it’s almost definitely going to introduce problems that you are less likely to see than if you wrote the application yourself, leading to (among other things) deep technical debt.
Again, that’s probably fine if you’re just making a simple website for your small local business or something like that. But there’s consensus in the development community that it’s a dangerous path to walk at enterprise scale.
If you’re “vibe working” or “vibe writing” in Microsoft Word, you’re doing the same thing, but with a text document: You’re telling it what you want the document to say, reading it, accepting the suggestion, and then asking for further changes until you’re happy with it.
Whether this makes any sense obviously depends on what kind of document you’re writing. For some things, it should be just fine as long as someone is reading it. Others probably won’t work for their intended purpose without a human touch. Same with PowerPoint presentations.
Doing this with a spreadsheet could be riskier, though; the financial or legal consequences for bad math or data in spreadsheets of some types can be very high, and as with vibe coding, it might be hard to see the problems at the surface level.
That’s exactly why Microsoft hasn’t been as aggressive in adding AI features to Excel as it has with some other applications. And to be fair, it acknowledges an important gap here: a SpreadsheetBench sheet in today’s announcement notes that Copilot in Excel Agent Mode managed a 57.2 percent score, while a human typically manages 71.3 percent. So, as with vibe coding, you’d want to be highly selective about when and how you’d use this, and you’d want to make sure that an experienced human is auditing the output carefully.