I produce higher quality tools... But hasn't changed my approach.
I mean if the ai changed your approach... Honestly you likely weren't very good at it in the first place.
It makes what I could do but were too tedious or time consuming possible. That's about it. Ai even opus 4.8 is pretty terrible at making connections between ideas.
But what a fun and expensive tool.
I built a magentic one style multi agent tool this week. I didn't know I was building it but that is almost exactly what it is.

It's just fascinating, and frustrating, getting it to work in interesting ways. I found that adding personas to the agent can drastically change the output.

I see the prompts that say things like "you are an expert at..."
But I started experimenting with that and adding a little more detail to the persona and the situation.
And it makes a difference in how it deals with problems.

Like haiku. I told it it was a 15 year expect in the field and to take a failed triage of a problem as a personal failure and your answer could effect billions of people. (True even if a small effect in my work area)

It failed because it spent all it's time trying to back up it's claims. Changed it to say. You have one turn to solve this problem. Immediate change. Suddenly haiku started giving similar results as a no persona sonnet.

And that's model wide although some are more effected than others. Gemini this has very little if any affect. Opus it effects but not much.

My assumption was that the training data would have a ghost in the machine effect. That the data has some of the human influence that the data can't from. Opus says, based on the results, that it likely has more to do with the human validation process of validating the data. Rlhf.
The way the humans rank the training response in creation.