Whether it is acceptable to drop code comments and design documentation now that the AI tooling can explain the code on demand comes up in the design review. What is the right answer?

The correct answer is the option saying no: relying on a tool to regenerate explanations on demand is not a substitute for documentation that preserves intent and supports maintainability over time. Documentation records intent, context, and decisions that a code-explanation feature cannot fully reconstruct after the fact, so removing it undermines the maintainability optimization documentation protects. The option saying yes because generated explanations are always identical to human-authored text is incorrect because generated explanations describe what code does, not necessarily why it was written that way, and can vary between runs. The option saying yes because documentation slows the build pipeline is incorrect because documentation does not run as part of the build and has no bearing on build speed. The option saying it depends only on codebase size is incorrect because maintainability, not codebase size, is the relevant factor. For the exam, keep documentation regardless of what explanatory tooling is available.