I'm a manager and the VPs are starting to ask - how many story points are we getting with AI now. Now we do story points = number of days to implement. (I know this is not real agile but just assume you are in the same position)

I can't answer that question but plenty of other managers are fully ready to just give bogus numbers.

For my team, use of AI has indeed lowered the story point cost. The coding part of the story takes less work so we have started to lower the story point cost for stories that would previously cost more. Think of a 5SP to 3SP reduction.

We have increased the number of features being delivered but our number of story points delivered has remained static.

When management starts tracking improvements in story point productivity then the agile teams inflate their story point estimates. Sometimes this involves splitting user stories in ways that don't really make sense from a customer perspective just for the sake of having a place to tack on more points.

And I'm not opposed to using story points, they have some utility within an agile team or program. They just aren't a valid way of quantifying productivity changes.

> story points = number of days to implement

Some variant of this has been the case in every agile team I've ever worked on.