I've lost count recently of how many times Claude has given me something in this style that I can't understand, and then I ask it to rework parts of it, and then it tells me that the original things it claimed weren't actually quite right anyway.
I'm starting to read it as a sign of low LLM effort not just low human effort. It seems most common when one few-sentence prompt leads it to generate 4+ paragraphs (and the longer the output, the worse the odds). Prompting to dig into each resulting paragraph one by one, to make them readable, makes it do higher-effort deep dives.
I've had that several times. It says something I don't quite understand (complex, jargon, non sequitur or otherwise makes no sense to me), so I ask it to explain, and it discovers it was wrong. And apparently more people are having this experience. Why does that keep happening?
At least it emphasises the importance of truly understanding what Claude is saying. Because if you don't understand it, there's a good chance it's wrong. Do not ever think you're stupid for not understanding something Claude says.