So... I had a case of... "nested type hell" and something didn't work because I was trying to access it in the wrong way

and I guess the interesting bit is that even if it had been "typed" that wouldn't have helped, because the breakdown of the type is what I wanted, not just the naming.

static typing carries the assumption that just because something is named, the reader is fully able to then handle the object.

but that is not something guaranteed by the typing system.

I would actually like something like a "type workbench" that allows me to inspect a variable / type and deep dive into how to access parts of it.

So, "describing the type" and "giving more type information" is a possible helping element, but the way it is done at the moment isn't the way I would want it to be done.