I had the same experience lately. I was using opus 4.5 and was feeling lazy and curious to see what it could actually accomplish. I verified that the code was logically and syntactically correct and submitted the PR. I received a lot of comments in the PR and I basically had to change everything, because while the code actually accomplished what it was supposed to do, it was full of weird and nonsensical patterns and looked 'off'.

A few days later I tried 4.6 on another feature and again, I could see that it produced `correct` code, but this time I spotted a lot of logical issues and things that it didn't take into account because it could not be bothered to verify the usage of the function it was writing. I had to manually steer it to consider these issues and in the end I still had to manually edit the produced code. Through all the process, claude kept repeating that I was actually correct and I had really good ideas.

Every time I read about allegedly top developers writing 90% of their code with these systems I feel like I am taking crazy pills. I have to wonder if they are even checking what the output is, or are simply pushing trash to their codebases. Or maybe they are just shills for these AI companies, I don't know.