One annoying trend in frontier models which contributes to the brainrot is:

- agent loops for a long time (minutes to hours), writing a lot of code

- agent gives high level summary of the outcome of the work, not the work itself, i.e. "Implemented and pushed feature XX. Focused tests and checks passed."

- requires detailed review of the large changes which can be exhausting, so just accepting it becomes easier

I really wish the models would explain more of the "how" and "why" of the implementation decisions. To combat this, I usually to bug the agent to discuss more including what assumptions it made and alternatives it considered.

Sure, this can be added to AGENTS.md but I view overengineered AGENTS.md as an antipattern and can work against us especially given the rapid advancements of the models.

What does seem to work is planning first via a very synchronous back and forth with an expensive model before tasking 1+ cheaper models to implement in parallel, then getting an expensive model to review while I look over things manually.