Of course I care deeply about the output, I work with it daily.
I just don't care how it looks to a human - LLMs have their own criteria of what is readable and manageable to them, and if you try to enforce human readability you will bump into a ton of antipatterns that will cause more and more issues.
Also, the default code management tools from Codex/CC are either basic (Grep/Edit), or - if you try to use some open source ones - unlikely to be used by agents. It took some time, but once I got agents to navigate the codebase efficiently, and produce code that is accessible to them, I stopped having problems with bugs or increasing complexity.
If you begin treating human interventions as an error in a process - and do after action reviews and so on after each such intervention - then after a few months you end up with quite a smooth-working system.
I just don't care how it looks to a human - LLMs have their own criteria of what is readable and manageable to them, and if you try to enforce human readability you will bump into a ton of antipatterns that will cause more and more issues.
Also, the default code management tools from Codex/CC are either basic (Grep/Edit), or - if you try to use some open source ones - unlikely to be used by agents. It took some time, but once I got agents to navigate the codebase efficiently, and produce code that is accessible to them, I stopped having problems with bugs or increasing complexity.
If you begin treating human interventions as an error in a process - and do after action reviews and so on after each such intervention - then after a few months you end up with quite a smooth-working system.