The big thing I expect at the next level is in using Claude to first generate UI-based automation based on an end user's instructions, then automatically defining a suite of end-to-end tests, confirming with the user "is this how it should work?", and then finally using this suite to reimplement the flow from first principles.
I know we're still a bit far from there, but I don't see a particular hurdle that strikes me as requiring novel research.
But does it do any better at soliciting the surprise requirements from the user, who after confirming that everything works, two months later reports a production bug because the software isn't correctly performing the different reqirements on the first Tuesday of each quarter that you never knew about.
I once had an executive ask to start an incident because he was showing a client the app and a feature that he wanted that had never been spec’d didn’t exist.
I know we're still a bit far from there, but I don't see a particular hurdle that strikes me as requiring novel research.