I don’t know in how much its applies for an architectual design process, since I started my career in the automotive industry and never actually worked as architect. I see things like this:
Grasshopper is a tradeoff. You get repetive things done without directly modelling it. But by doing algorithmic or parametric design you always give up control. This is why parametric CAD system don’t work for ‘Design’ so much, and why direct modelling CAD actually exists and is still widely used.
So I always asking myself is it really required to create a shape parametric or not?
I think the biggest misconception about Grasshopper or AI in Design is about the idea of having a superiour or next generation modelling/design process. This idea is actually based on a lack of knowledge. Many people simple don’t know how to do proper and efficent 3d modelling. This limits them in expressing their ideas (if they even have them). The idea is, if I don’t know maybe a piece of code will know… which obviously is an error.
If you decide to create parametric or even generative models, it doesn’t make sense to expose anything parametric. If a parameter has no relevance make it a constant. Nor it makes sense to create a full parametric model at all.
I would rather promote a divide and conquer approach. Reduce the parametric part to its bare minimum with manual pre- and postprocessing, even having multiple stages where a model becomes dumb again and get parameterized again. This is no flaw but rather an advantage.
It really is hard to create generalized solutions, but you can break it down to smaller groups. If you keep modularity, you can apply your modules on different design models.
Just a simple example would be a simple facade. If you have 20 pattern which work on a rectangular surface, you can apply them and create 200 permutations (by setting some but few parameters). These 200 variations may already be better then any AI could “produce”. Of course this input and output may be simplified, but constant refinement is a must. Something similar about primitive geometries. This is something which doesn’t work in automotive, but in architecture you could use gh to do simple form finding before doing manual refinement. So what I’m saying is that you create helper functionality not full solutions… And I still see no real need for AI in this process.