If you're not even asking the questions, you probably don't know what it's writing. That's essentially the same as saying you don't care about the quality of what you produce.
That's not new, it's just not something most people would've admitted to until recently.
Of course I care deeply about the output, I work with it daily.
I just don't care how it looks to a human - LLMs have their own criteria of what is readable and manageable to them, and if you try to enforce human readability you will bump into a ton of antipatterns that will cause more and more issues.
Also, the default code management tools from Codex/CC are either basic (Grep/Edit), or - if you try to use some open source ones - unlikely to be used by agents. It took some time, but once I got agents to navigate the codebase efficiently, and produce code that is accessible to them, I stopped having problems with bugs or increasing complexity.
If you begin treating human interventions as an error in a process - and do after action reviews and so on after each such intervention - then after a few months you end up with quite a smooth-working system.