> The point is requirements change, features are added, and when an abstraction becomes wrong, tear it out.

I like this phrasing a lot, thanks for this!

I'm still wondering if there's also potential in avoiding the wrong abstractions in the first place. For that we'd need a "cheap" way to decide whether an abstraction is good/bad/something else.

Is there generally applicable, widely accepted principles or research around this? A quick search only revealed random blog posts; nothing I'd consider widely accepted.