An Observation on AI-Generated Documentation

With the rise of modern AI tools, the concept of generating complete, gapless documentation for an entire codebase seems tempting at first glance. It appears to be the ultimate solution: every function, variable, and logic branch automatically explained. However, upon closer inspection, this approach reveals significant downsides.

No seasoned developer would voluntarily document every single detail—and for good reason. If every line of code were commented, the famous mantra “Read the fucking code” (RTFC) would lose its validity. Yet, RTFC remains entirely justified, especially when dealing with low-level details. Often, the code itself is the most precise description of what is happening at the machine level.

Documentation intended for users—whether other developers or DevOps engineers—should not attempt to include everything. Such “completeness” dilutes the critical information. Readers are forced to wade through a mountain of trivial details to find the actual architectural decisions or usage patterns. This is frustrating, time-consuming, and ultimately leads to the documentation being ignored because the signal gets lost in the noise. Good documentation curates knowledge; it does not merely duplicate it.