Actually, staticly typed languages are easier for both humans and machines; however dynamically typed languages are harder for humans and probably neutral for LLMs. LLM should be able to infer usage (hence "typing") because it can put the entire codebase in its context, while humans cannot.
I'd count in LLM coding agents favour: e.g. willingness and capability to do things which I'd have to go read a tutorial for; as well as rapidly being able to iterate and narrow down e.g. when given access to a repl.
Rhombus looks promising in terms of tooling.
On the other hand: LLMs are susceptible to incorrectly guessing "I think it should work this way".. I'd guess the powerful flexibility of metaprogramming could be more annoying than helpful. But, I'm curious.