> ...good PMs which by definition review and write good tickets with a clear explanation of the problem and what they want the solution to be

This is where the problem is — such PMs are not "good PMs...by definition". They are usually terrible PMs who start with a solution they envision and work backwards to a customer problem or two.

PMs should be able to clearly form a customers' world model, fit that into their business, and clearly articulate needs to the "builders": UX designers and software engineers.

Builders need to form a sufficiently good mental model of the needs to be able to quickly envision a few solutions with different balance between effort/cost and customer/business value, and then dive deeper on the one they agree on with a PM.

IOW, solutions are provided by the builders who understand the effort part better than the PMs.

Yes, there are PMs who can do that just as well (frequently designers/engineers who switched careers, but not only!) — yet they are far and few between!

This desire to own the solution is usually why engineers and PMs cross horns, and why many a smart person will appear a terrible PM too.