It seems to me that if they'd just about reached their upper limits in early 2024 agentic coding wouldn't be eating software development like it is now, and wasn't then.
I don't care if the claims are correct or incorrect. I just think the tone of the article is dishonest about its own impartiality and fairness, because it doesn't even attempt to interpret the claims in any way except the least favorable. If you want to be persuasive, you should refute a claim using the most favorable interpretation of that claim possible -- this does the opposite.