I've been using saltstack for a handful of years (migrated from puppet) to run my lab, among other things. I have 50 or 60 modules and use pillarstack for data.
I've managed the upgrade to 3008.2, kicking and screaming. Little by little debugged everything, and it was all 'working'.
Some bits, like the telegraf, dovecot, postfix modules (and a dozen others) I'd pulled down from the community and either used as is, or took a stab at modernizing. 'Working' but not amazing.
I just finished a round of throwing Claude at Openclaw, debugging some nasty local model issues, so i figured 'why not?'.
5 days later, totally out of tokens. Some modules - zabbix for example supported antique versions (3.4?!) where the modern version is well past that (7.4 is stable).
I've run every module through one of these. Had them build better readme.md. Better pillar examples. Fix a lot of the dark corners I never touched - in some cases catching some 'fun' bugs (like how the zabbix module COULD in some cases, cause a data loss).
Then I got greedy. There's no apparmor module, I wanted one. How about something to handle encrypted secrets without having to go to vault or the like? What about triggering updates on git commit without either a) gitfs, b) a stupid cron or c) external access to the host.
I've spent a stupid amount of time reading code and fixing LLM assumptions. That said, everything works (including my mailserver config, which encompasses no less than 14 modules, 18 pillar files, and a handful of state, cert, and other files).
I wish the community was more active - but take https://github.com/saltstack-formulas/salt-formula/pulls -- the formula to install salt. 19 pull requests, going back 7 years. That's a bit soul sucking.
tl;dr - if you make a point of writing and understanding salt it doesn't hurt to feed it into an LLM and see what comes out. I wouldn't recommend it if you can't read the code, and I also wouldn't recommend deploying anything without being sure it's both understood and tested.