> Here's what I mean by "good code": [...]

What a fantastic list. I'll be saving it to show the junior developers.

My only nitpick is that "reliability" should have been a point by itself. All the other "ilities" can be appropriately sacrificed in some context, but I've never seen unreliable software being praised for its code quality.

Which is part of why LLMs are so frustrating. They're extremely useful and extremely unreliable.