most generative tools are good at tasks and bad at architecture. effective QA of generated code is still at an infant stage no matter what anyone claims, much less automated effective QA; teams that care deeply about getting things right the first time will have a worse time with it on the median than teams that don't.
don't trust the code it generates, but "don't trust" doesn't mean discard it. don't trust the architecture it invents for a problem, it can't reason at that level, it's literally aping the background noise of the entire internet and building things that are dead-center mediocre.
there's not enough specifics in your wall of text to help me point out what's going on in any useful detail, though.
i will say that HN users are more likely to be ecstatic at building an MVP that they never have to support; the scale of a company where you have 6 years experience but are still new on your team is bigger than where most of HN lives and works. the dissonance would be the same if it was 10 years ago, LLMs didn't meaningfully exist, and you'd be on here asking HN why some of these so-called lean teams everyone's posting about all of a sudden seem to be so much more productive than when your boss at BiggerCorp tried to streamline processes and then got yelled at by CS, sales enablement, and marketing.