Do Founding teams lose product intent between task and PR?

Hey IH,

I’m a founder working on an existing product with a small team.

I’m trying to get inputs from technical founders, CTOs, and founding engineers with users, pilots, or customer pressure, especially if you are adding a junior dev, contractor, intern, or next engineer and do not have a dedicated product person yet.

Here’s a pain I’m testing: You explain a feature, fix, or product change. Then a contributing engineer beyond the founding team builds it.

The code may match the task, but miss why the change mattered.
Then in the longer run it shows up as wrong scope, rework, longer review, QA cleanup, release delay, or the founder/lead having to explain the same thing again.

A few questions:

1. Does this happen often enough to matter, or do your tasks carry enough product context into the work?
2. When product intent gets lost, what does it usually cost: rework, longer review, QA issues, release delay, or repeated founder/lead explanation?
3. Who owns this today: founder, CTO, founding engineer, product person, or whoever wrote the task?
4. If something kept the reason for a change, expected behavior, and review context attached through PR/review, would that be useful enough to pay for?

Curious to hear from founders / founding teams who have seen this in a real -time : does losing product intent between task and PR cost you, or is it just acceptable noise?