I think that the start of the article was interesting, then it goes down the path of middle managers being the root of all evil, just seems a bit like whiplash.
I completely agree with building the wrong thing is the root cause of a lot of failures. In fact, I think that AI has stopped a lot of the conversation of "Why should I not build this". Historically, that answer was ROI - why spend days/weeks/months on something that might not be valuable. Now I see people just saying "Yes, and" to all feature requests.
I have a similar project that I have built and found great success with it storing things like coding standards, decisions, etc.
One thing that is interesting during my work is that Codex and OpenCode using OpenAI models are REALLY good at using the tool, whereas new models and changes in Claude code keep making it difficult to stay on top of it's usability there. It seems like instructions and/or models are changing that cause for it to prefer the Claude Code memory tooling instead of allowing for remote memory tooling.
Opus 5 seems to have made it materially worse (or some harness change around Opus 5, I haven't dug in entirely to analyze). I had to get more in-depth setup instructions to make sure that Claude Code would consistently use my memory tooling.
New claude models, at least in the context of Claude code, are broadly lobotomized. Move extra slow, write loads tooling scripts you didnt’t ask for, and don’t actually complete the task at hand. They’re like rain man.
Idk though it ebbs and flows. Rn latest OpenAI models are capable of long focused decent work. Surely it’ll flip at some point in the near future /sigh
I completely agree with building the wrong thing is the root cause of a lot of failures. In fact, I think that AI has stopped a lot of the conversation of "Why should I not build this". Historically, that answer was ROI - why spend days/weeks/months on something that might not be valuable. Now I see people just saying "Yes, and" to all feature requests.