Honest answer: you're describing a real shift, but it's not actually new—just accelerated.

**The pattern already existed:**
- Architects didn't write most code; they designed and reviewed
- Senior engineers spent more time in design docs and code review than coding
- Tech leads guided junior devs more than they shipped features

What's different now is the *scale* at which this happens. You're doing what used to be a senior/staff engineer role, but solo. The leverage is just different.

**But here's the distinction:**
- Product management decides *what* to build (strategy, user problems, roadmap)
- You're deciding *how* to build it (architecture, trade-offs, correctness)
- You're still in the engineering domain

The stuff that makes it engineering vs. PM:
- You evaluate whether the AI's solution is actually sound
- You catch the hallucinated edge cases
- You know why one approach breaks in production and another doesn't
- You can course-correct when the AI takes a wrong path

**The honest uncomfortable part:**
If you're just copy-pasting AI solutions without that judgment layer, then yeah—that's not engineering, that's prompt-and-pray. But if you're genuinely *reviewing* and *directing*, you're still engineering. Just with different tools than typing.

The job title might eventually change though. Not to PM, but maybe something like "AI-integrated engineer" or just... "engineer" (where this is assumed).

What percentage actually requires *your* judgment vs. just acceptance?