Just a little history lesson and a few words on:
So I currently do not test my packages in a clean chroot because of this issue: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/devtools/-/issues/105
It seems a little stupid but I hate sudo being installed on my system, I do not like it, and I do not like when tools force me to use sudo. Without sudo installed the makechrootpkg script breaks and thus I can't use dev tools to test in a chroot environment.
There's a very valid reason for doas' existence. sudo was becoming more and more bloated and that's not acceptable for such a security-centric and critical program. For quite a while sudo would continue to be updated to newer versions with more features, but the sudo that came with OpenBSD was intentionally held back because they were thought to be too risky or introduced more dependencies. I get why you'd want to use doas and avoid having sudo installed.
But the doas, or "opendoas," that Arch and some other Linuxes use has not been reviewed at all by OpenBSD people. It's an unofficial, third party port, in contrast to projects like OpenSSH, LibreSSL, OpenNTPD, etc that all have official portable versions for other operating systems handled by people directly involved with the code.
The doas Arch uses is from here:
But there was also a previous port located here:
In the exciting early days of doas, before the Duncaen version existed, the slicer69 version was what FreeBSD and some Linuxes distributed in their package repos. You'll notice now that pretty much everyone has switched over to the same one Arch is packaging... but why?
The original doas port was done very carelessly, without understanding of the differences between OpenBSD and Linux. Specifically OpenBSD has a lot of built-in protections that Linux does not have. This resulted in the first doas port having an awful security bug where anyone could become root without a valid password:
I'm told the version in use by Arch and others is a bit more careful with the porting process, but the point of this long email is to say that I still wouldn't consider "opendoas" to be leaps and bounds above sudo in terms of security.
In your case, I think the benefit of having a working devtools setup outweighs the benefits of clinging on to this third party doas port, but that's just my opinion.