On the other hand, how do you know what they're prompting? For all you know, the AI proposed the hacky 10 line fix and tour coworker was all hey let's fix this problem better.

Before AI, "now" was seen as the wrong place for a refactor because of the time and effort involved, but if the hacky patch of a fix is roughly the same amount of wall clock time as a 500 line proper fix that makes the problem go away forever, what's the argument that the 10 line hack is actually better?

Certainly refactoring is better than a hack fix, but what I'm talking about is where the 10 line fix cleanly and fully addresses the bug, and the refactor is just thrown in anyways.

> if the hacky patch of a fix is roughly the same amount of wall clock time as a 500 line proper fix

That only makes sense if the coworker isn't validating the fix and no one is reviewing the code. 500 lines of slop is going to take much longer if you have a human in the loop.