> LLMs are terrible at Haskell type design, but they're terrible at Rust type design too, terrible at deciding when and how to use Python classes, terrible at deciding when metaprogramming is appropriate, terrible at deciding what is well factored and what is not - great scripters, terrible lead engineers.

I find there are shibboleths you can say which get the LLM into a space where it can do better but generally I agree with you.

I also find that if the LLM is working in an existing code base with a really opinionated and consistently applied design that it will largely stay consistent with the codebase. Quality will drift as the ratio of human to LLM code changes so you periodically have to do a big cleanup to keep it from going too far.