zlacker

The problem with LLM-written is that I run into so many README.md's where it's clear the author barely read the thing they're expecting me to read and it's got errors that waste my time and energy.

I don't mind it if I have good reason to believe the author actually read the docs, but that's hard to know from someone I don't know on the internet. So I actually really appreciate if you are editing the docs to make them sound more human written.

>>furyof+(OP)
I think the other aspect is that if the README feels autogenerated without proper review, then my assumption is that the code is autogenerated without proper review as well. And I think that's fine for some things, but if I'm looking at a repo and trying to figure out if it's likely to work, then a lack of proper review is a big signal that the tool is probably going to fall apart pretty quickly if I try and do something that the author didn't expect.

>>MrJohz+Rw
I agree with that also.

I use this stuff heavily and I have some libraries I use that are very effective for me that I have fully vibed into existence. But I would NOT subject someone else to them, I am confident they are full of holes once you use them any differently than I do.

>>furyof+(OP)
The README is for your agent to read. Shrug.

>>laksjh+wu3
The agent having incorrect documentation in its context is really bad!