Why was The Austro-Hungarian Army so incompetent during the First World War

It's a really bad Youtube Channel that doesn't separate mythology from actual history. Even somewhat popular-history accounts like Keegan's "The First World War" is a much better source than that channel.

The Austro-Hungarian Army was far from incompetent, but it was a much weaker army than the Russian or German Army simply because Austria-Hungary was simply the weakest of the great powers.

It in fact had some pretty solid units like the Tyrolean Riflemen, and they in fact won quite a few victories against the Russians. The problem is that the Germans basically left most of the Eastern Front undefended, leaving the Austro-Hungarian Army to take on the bulk of both the Russian and Serbian armies. This resulted in heavy losses among the best and bravest of the Austro-Hungarian units which could not be replaced.

The "incompetence" of the Austro-Hungarian Army was ironically mostly an invention of the Germans, to justify their own stupid decision to focus on France and violating Belgian neutrality while leaving the Eastern Front unguarded. This was the favored narrative by the Kaiser especially after Germany's victory at Tannenberg, which ignores that the Germans had the advantage of terrain and friendly lines of communication to fight the Russians in East Prussia whereas the Austro-Hungarian Army had no such geographical advantages against the Russians. Worse the Kaiser even openly mocked the Austrians for failing to have their own Tannenberg, which in fact directly led to some of Conrad's more hasty decisions.

Edit- spelling, grammar.