A useful engineering summary explains the decisions behind the diff

Colin Breck argues that generated engineering documents often describe changes without explaining why they matter. A reviewer needs context about tradeoffs, risks and where their input is useful, not just a longer account of the diff. His own workflow keeps the writing personal while using AI to check it against code, configuration, logs and metrics.

Colin Breck · Sep 20, 2026

Why it matters

Useful when PR descriptions and design documents are getting longer without making review easier.

More context

Try writing the decision and requested feedback first, then use tools to verify concrete claims. Breck also distinguishes a design proposal used to reach agreement from a retrospective description of work already completed.

Keep in mind

This is the author’s engineering experience and argument, not a controlled productivity study. The lesson concerns ownership of the reasoning, not a ban on writing assistance.

Original read