This is maybe the dominant pattern of bad software design: Writeups describe a good idea, umbrella terms emerge to refer back to it ("discoverability"), and inexperienced designers/engineers try to implement the idea based only on the one-word description and the common knowledge surrounding it, rather than actually learning about the topic it describes. (Maybe they took a corporate learning course on the topic, created by people with similarly inadequate competence on the topic). It's like a game of telephone taken to the logical extreme. They are attempting to use lessons from others' successes, but the end result is even worse than if the designers/engineers used nothing but their own common sense to architect in an information vacuum.

This particular cause of abysmal, insulting UX is common in new teams with no experience among the staff, but there's just no word for how embarrassing it is that Microsoft suffers from it so often too.