Two engineers disagree about what code-explanation output from watsonx Code Assistant for Z is actually meant for, and need a single correct answer to settle it. Which is correct?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Use the output to speed up your understanding of COBOL logic, then have SMEs validate it before you rely on it. That's the whole pattern.
Full Explanation
The correct choice is using the output to accelerate understanding of COBOL logic and having SMEs validate the results before relying on them. This pairing - fast generated understanding checked by an SME - is the intended pattern for the workflow. Treating the output as the final authority on application behaviour with no further review is incorrect because it skips the validation the workflow relies on. Using it only for logic that is already well documented elsewhere is incorrect because the tool is most useful precisely where documentation is thin, not where it already exists. Using it to replace SME involvement in understanding legacy logic is incorrect because the workflow is designed to involve SMEs, not remove them. For the exam, remember the pattern: accelerate, then validate.