Kenton Varda说AI写commit消息只列细节缺框架，建议自己写或写prompt，比你用AI生成废话强。
Kenton Varda指出，团队用AI写的代码变更描述（如PR和commit消息）只列出代码细节，省略了理解代码所需的高层次框架，对审查者来说比没用更糟。他建议让AI写代码但不要写描述，或者写prompt而不是输出。Simon Willison引用此观点，并承认自己让Claude和GLT-5.5写commit消息后也感到不安。一个好的简短描述只需几分钟，且如果写的人不理解代码，就不应该合并。
I've been letting Claude and GLT-5.5 write almost all of my commit messages recently, but I don't fe...
I've been letting Claude and GLT-5.5 write almost all of my commit messages recently, but I don't feel great about it "omitting the higher-level framing needed to understand broadly what the code is doing" is definitely the key problem there Kenton Varda @KentonVarda I just declared a moratorium against AI-written change descriptions (e.g. PR and commit messages, also issues/tickets) from my team. AI was writing change descriptions that were worse than useless to me as I tried to review PRs: outlining details of the code that could easily be seen by looking at the code, but omitting the higher-level framing needed to understand broadly what the code is doing. I think people like having AI write these things because the output looks structured and thorough, which makes it feel professional in a way. But this isn't actually valuable. Concise, high-level descriptions are better for everyone. If I need to use my own AI to interpret what your AI wrote then something is wrong. Let AI write code, sure, but for the description, I'd rather see your prompt than your output. We could maybe have extended agents.md with guidelines on writing descriptions, but this seemed a bit pointless since a good, concise change description only takes a few minutes to write -- not a significant time savings to delegate to AI. At least, it doesn't take long if you understand the code -- and if you don't understand the code, then I'm definitely not merging it. 🔗 View Quoted Tweet 💬 10 🔄 1 ❤️ 47 👀 7237 📊 12 ⚡