I’m on board with your caveat. I have no issues with using AI to analyze the writing to identify potential issues. I currently use spell/grammar checking and I have no qualms about that. A more robust proofreader does seem useful.
To your point, I’d want to constrain such a review to identifying structural or consistency issues vs. the AI getting involved with the subject matter itself.
The issue I ran into the few times I wrote something and asked ChatGPT to read it and identify any issues was that it was all too eager to tell me how to massively restructure things. The result read like typical AI slop. This was a prompting issue on my part because I gave it instructions that were too open ended. Careful/restrictive prompting is definitely necessary to make this viable.
To your point, I’d want to constrain such a review to identifying structural or consistency issues vs. the AI getting involved with the subject matter itself.
The issue I ran into the few times I wrote something and asked ChatGPT to read it and identify any issues was that it was all too eager to tell me how to massively restructure things. The result read like typical AI slop. This was a prompting issue on my part because I gave it instructions that were too open ended. Careful/restrictive prompting is definitely necessary to make this viable.