One would think that an company creating cutting edge AI tools, would dog-food that AI biggly. Like, using it for discoverability, here, or having a chat-with-d

One would think that an company creating cutting edge AI tools, would dog-food that AI biggly. Like, using it for discoverability, here, or having a chat-with-docs system, like groq does. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Though they do use it for prompt generation. I wonder.... The prompt generators can't really go wrong. I mean, they can look better or worse, subjectively. But a QnA bot answering questions about docs can be objectively wrong. Is this calculated to improve the optics, and avoid a lot of hallucination complaints?