This sets up a pointless strawman about reviews for the headline that distracts so much from the point that I only caught it on second read:

Restrict agentic workflows to implementation details, hand-write the higher-level logic and critical tests, and only pay attention to whether those human-written tests pass or fail. Then you don't have to worry about reviewing agent-generated code as long as the human-written tests about the functionality pass.

(Still not sure I agree, not least of which for security and performance reasons at existing orgs; this assumes very good test coverage and design exist before any code is written. Interesting for greenfield projects though.)