Tina should take some lessons from Wally. Her writing would then say everything and nothing at the same time. The PHB would be totally impressed, even though he scarcely understood a word of it, and would congratulate her on a great job so that he wouldn't look like a fool. The CEO would believe that everything was running smoothly at the company so he could go on a fact finding jaunt to his favorite vacation spot. Wally would, as usual, go back and forth to the coffee pot with a peaceful knowing smile on his face. The Zen of Wally....
I'm an Engineer, but have spent a bit of time as a technical author. It was ok, we had editors making sure we weren't writing nonsense.
But found there were two styles of writing when it came to something you didn't know about or understand. One was to ask the client (who did all the engineering) a few questions and resolve the issue. But we had quite a few that chose plan B - write about it anyway.
Trouble is, I'm not cut out to be an author. I want to do things, not write about what someone else did. So it was a soul !$%*!$% job to me. Each to their own.
I worked in a large international company, where the documentation is a strictly controlled process with its own QA manager and complicated audit and approval process.
My managers explained to me what to do: "Don't put anything important in the documentation. Anything that could change in the next version is a disaster to identify, update, approve and release."
So I asked "what can I write" and they said "put general facts which will also be valid in the future."
"For example, you can write 'Software is good'. Okay that's too confident. Try to write 'We like software'. That always works! (smiling) Yep, gotta keep those QA guys happy!"
Dr. Jerry Pournelle, a established professional writer of some renown, has said that he has to chop lots of extra writing to make publishers happy. He observed that it made the story better and the writing clearer.