I agree that LLMs are almost more likely than not to answer documentation questions wrong, to hallucinate methods that don’t exist, or just be silly. But the value I see in allowing LLMs to train on documentation is in the glue code that an LLM could (potentially!) generate.

Documentation, even good docs, usually only answer the question “What does this method/class/general idea do?” Really good docs will come with some examples of connecting A and B. But they will often not include examples of connecting A to E when you have to transform via P because of business requirements, and almost never tell you how to incorporate third-party libraries X, Y, and Z.

As an engineer, I can read the docs and figure out the bits, but having an LLM suggest some of the intermediary or glue steps, even if wrong sometimes, is a benefit I don’t get only from good documentation.