Something is bothering me a bit when I come across changes Owlcat made to the game mechanics compared to the pen and paper version of the game.

There are plenty of cases in which I can understand these changes and where any differences do not pose a problem when reporting a bug or some other oversight, but I have come across a few cases in which it left me wandering whether or not changes made were intentional.

For example, When you pick an animal companion and look at the Wrecker archetype you can see the abilities do not match the pen and paper version, though its mostly phrasing. But looking at level 9 you see in the companion progression table that it adds "Destructive Wrecker", but the box itself is empty. Does this mean the ability is a left over and has no meaning? (a cosmetic bug?) Or does it actually add the ability (which would according to the pen and paper version give your companion the ability to hit as if its attacks were made from adamantine versus objects and constructs).

Another example is the Disciple of the Pike; the archetype is supposed to support two weapon fighting groups (spears and polearms), requiring you to select one of those groups in the Weapon Training ability, but in the game only the spears group is selectable, while polearms is only supported in the Pike Charge ability.

Is there a way to find out whether or not differences are the result of design or oversight?

An efficient way to differentiate would be helpful when filling out bug reports.