This sums up my current bugbear with people using Claude, as its output is too verbose. I don’t mind the use of agentic tools, though I want a concise explanation written by a human.
But where it starts to get dicey is when you have both jargon and long text explanations being generated by machines, for people at different levels of understanding. “Bumped dependencies” is good. Everyone knows we are updating packages. “Performed a scheduled dependency refresh as part of ongoing maintenance practices. Minor and patch-level version bumps were applied across the dependency graph, including transitive dependencies where applicable” is bad.
I honestly think this is one of the biggest challenges that needs to be solved. The constant jargon, poor naming choices and assumed prior knowledge of pages of text is extremely fatiguing. It only gets worse as the volume of LLM-generated content in your project increases.
This sums up my current bugbear with people using Claude, as its output is too verbose. I don’t mind the use of agentic tools, though I want a concise explanation written by a human.
I’ve found success in telling Claude to keep it brief and to use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_Technical_English
I honestly think this is one of the biggest challenges that needs to be solved. The constant jargon, poor naming choices and assumed prior knowledge of pages of text is extremely fatiguing. It only gets worse as the volume of LLM-generated content in your project increases.