That's a very good way to describe what they do (better than 'AI') but ironically, it really well explains the mechanism, and how they are in fact able to 'code so well' which is contrary to the authors own premise.

Agents code extremely well.

They're not particularly good at 'architecture' and I think that's where his specific concerns about 'not being able to see the problems' arise - the issues are are almost never in the syntax, because the AI writes perfect code. The issue is that it's not doing exactly what you intended.

Instead of 'missing the target' ... it's 'hit the wrong target perfectly'.

Any senior developer working with AI daily should be able to have a baseline intuition for all of this, and would therefore reject the hyperbole of the premise 'it can't code!'.

Of course it's producing gargantuan amounts of slop - that's not because 'it can't code', that's something else entirely.