I’m going to assume you’re open to an honest discussion here.

> "assuming it had the same expertise in each language" is the most important part here, because the expertise of AI with these languages is very different.

You are correct, but I am trying to illustrate that assuming some ideal system with equal expertise, the languages with more safety would win out in productivity/bugs over those with less safety.

As in to say that it could be worth investing further in safer programming languages because AI would benefit.

> We need these constraints because we can't reliably track all the necessary details.

AI cannot reliably track the details either (yet, though I am sure it can be done). Even if it could, it would be a complete waste of resources (tokens).

Why have an AI determine the type of a variable when it could be done in a deterministic manner with a compiler or linter?

To me these arguments closely mirror/follow arguments of static/dynamically typed languages for human programmers. Static type systems eliminate certain kinds of errors and can produce higher quality programs. AI systems will benefit in the same way if not more by getting instant feedback on the validity of their program.