Codex and claude give a nice report and if I see they're not considering this or that I can tell em.
but, why is it a big issue? if it does something bad, just reset the worktree and try again with a different model/agent? They are dirt cheap at 20/m and I have 4 subscription(claude, codex, cursor, zed).
The thing about good abstractions is that you should be able to trust in a composable way. The simpler or more low-level the building blocks, the more reliable you should expect them to be. In LLMs you can't really make this assumption.
> The issue is that if it's struggling sometimes with basic instruction following, it's likely to be making insidious mistakes in large complex tasks that you might no have the wherewithal or time to review.
Yes, that's why we review all code even when written by humans.
The issue to me is that I have no idea of what the code looks like and have to have a reliable first layer model that can summarize current codebase state so I can decide whether the next mutation moves the project forward or reduces technical debt. I can delegate much more that way, while gemini "do first" approach tend to result in many dead ends that I have to unravel.