If we accept that there's not much learning from doing the "same" questions, like find the derivative of $x^2$, and $x^3$, and $x^4$ due to the algorithmic way of how it's done, then what happens when it applies to questions in a more subtle way?
To use an example, I've always found implicit differentiation to be very algorithmic, to the point that comparing different examples will showcase the same general ideas but with different functions. For example, if you look at example 5 of Paul's online math notes, aren't those 3 specific examples are structurally the same, but have variations of functions. I could have given 3 steps in the algorithm as this:
Differentiate with respect to x
Remember to use chain rule for y so that you get y'
Solve for the derivative y'
For sake of argument, if I'm designing questions on implicit differentiation to test if students know a calculus concept, rather than designing a test to see if they know how to algebraically manipulate things, then (1) should I do more creative questions, and (2) how would I do that?
I think open ended questions and examples would be more helpful for conceptual understanding, like "at what angles do these curves intersect?" or "are these curves orthogonal?" but I won't specifically mention implicit differentiation. It might be likely that the answer is found via implicit differentiation if it's in the implicit differentiation section, but don't think I can do much about that. Or maybe "what's the relationship between $c$, and the $x$- and $y$-intercepts of any line tangent to the graph of $\sqrt{x}+\sqrt{y}=\sqrt{c}$?"
But anyway, in general, if I analyze a bunch of questions and see that they're all variations of the same structure, then should that structure be pointed out? (I find, if it is, then we can move onto more interesting and/or creative questions. Or, at least, move onto questions that focus on understanding the concepts at hand rather than seeing if the student knows the prerequisite algebraic manipulation skills)