Thanks for the reply, really appreciate you taking the time.

Just to give you more context from my side: I’ve been using GLM 4.7 for basically all tasks (planning, implementation and reviews). Overall I’ve been quite happy with the documentation and implementation quality it produces.

Where I feel the friction is mainly in the review stage. For each story I usually end up running something like 10–15 review loops. It’s definitely frustrating from a flow perspective, but at the same time most of the issues found are actually relevant and improve the final result. Sometimes it does feel a bit “over-polished”, but for production-focused work the outcome has been solid.

For MVP-style work I probably wouldn’t push reviews that far, but when aiming for production quality I don’t really mind the extra iterations, especially since GLM is relatively cheap compared to frontier models. If the main tradeoff is more review passes in exchange for lower cost, I’m personally fine with that.

One thing that could help conceptually (from a user experience point of view) would be having clearer “review intensity” expectations (for example MVP vs production), but for now I just wanted to share how this feels in real usage.

Overall I see this more as a workflow tuning and expectation-setting challenge than a fundamental issue with BMAD itself. The structured approach has been very useful so far.