I think validating a fully generated novel of a ticket, is much harder than thinking through the problem in the first place and creating your own ticket.

We see it with code too right? It’s harder to review code than to write it.

On top of that the LLM can work so fast that the amount of things that need validating grows!

This is where humans get lazy and the problems come in IMO. Whether its a PM not validating their ticket, or a dev doing a bad code review.

Add on to that that the incentives currently are to move fast and trust the AI.

It becomes clear to me that a lot of that review work either won’t be done at all, or won’t be nearly thorough enough.

The tickets are not "novel"-length, they are about a few bulleted lists of the sections I mentioned above. In that case it is indeed way easier to review that a ticket only saying "do X with Y data."

Reviewing code is harder than reviewing text because code does something and has interdependencies and therefore must be correct in its function, do not mix the two. This is like saying an editor reviewing an article or novel is harder than actually writing the novel which is blatantly incorrect.

I agree. I hate getting tickets like this because they’ve often gone down the wrong path and I have to work backwards to understand the actual problem and the right way to solve it