My opinion: race organisers rarely design them thinking about one specific rider, but I'm sure that they usually think about the profile of riders they want/can attract from the current peloton. For example, at the moment we have 2+1 riders clearly above everyone else, Poga-Roglic+Bernal, and they are also the top climbers out there. Climbing wise and beyond these 3, there are not a lot of outstanding climbers in the current peloton. There's Quintana and Nibali of course, but they are far from their career best. S. Yates is not a consistent outstanding climber, Dan Martin just retired and we are left with MAL - an outstanding climber with no TT ability, that has not found a way of translating his skills into consistent GC results.
What we have is a bunch of pretty good climbers, like Woods, Carapaz, Gaudu, Mas, Bardet, Haig, G. Martin, Bilbao, Caruso, O'Connor, Hindley and a few others. Of these, not all are all-rounded or have found the consistency needed to ride for the top of a GT GC; and few have time-trialing skills above the average - in fact, only Almeida, Vingegaard and Evenopoel, perhaps Foss, and these are all youngsters that had not a chance to consistently prove their skills in GT battles - and/or might not even have them.
Imho, routes like Giro'22 are designed to target this group of pretty good climbers, Woods, Carapaz, etc. It's like telling them come, there aren't many TT kms and HC climbs, where you will lose time for the all-rounders or the climbers in better shape that day. Come and you'll have a chance of winning a GT in the era of Roglic and Pogacar. I don't dislike the route for 22, and there are some pretty good stages, but I agree with most of you: way too little ITT, no off-road/gravel, no proper Queen stage, too many fully flat stages.