Comprehension Debt Is an Engineering Leadership Problem
Engineering teams adopting AI agents are generating more code than ever, and the standard signals engineering leaders rely on to assess team health show no cause for concern. Velocity metrics are up, pull request counts have climbed, and test coverage holds. DORA metrics reviewed in performance calibration meetings look healthy by any conventional standard.
What those metrics cannot capture is comprehension: the accumulated understanding of why the codebase is structured the way it is, which decisions were made under constraint, and how the system behaves at the edges. When AI agents produce code faster than any individual can reason through it, team comprehension erodes. The gap between what exists and what anyone truly understands is what Addy Osmani calls comprehension debt in a recent O'Reilly Radar piece, and it is dangerous precisely because it grows without triggering any of the standard alerts that normally reach leadership.
The response this situation demands goes beyond adding more tests or auditing individual pull requests more carefully. It requires deliberately managing pace, protecting time for learning, and reshaping expectations about where engineering judgment is expected to operate.

