All ideasMore in Work

Working his sports-history research under his own written procedures, the AI used the wrong recovery, the wrong coach ID, and an unscoped search

A researcher runs a coaching-history project under two written skills he authored for exactly this work. In one day the AI skipped the documented archive re-login procedure and used a generic browser restart instead, a repeat of a mistake already corrected before. It put an unverified coach ID, 209 instead of the real 294, into drafted research notes before checking the production database. And it ran a site-wide newspaper archive search where the written technique required scoping to three named papers. Every error was against a procedure that already existed in writing.

This one went wrong. Read what happened so you don’t hit the same problem.

How it works

  1. Archive session drops
  2. The AI uses a generic browser restart instead of the documented recovery command
  3. A coach ID is drafted from memory, 209, unchecked against the database where it is 294
  4. A site-wide archive search runs where the written method scopes to 3 named papers
  5. Errors caught in session and corrected

Why it’s worth knowing

Nothing was missing. The procedures were written, loaded, and previously corrected, and three of them were bypassed in a single day.

Where it’s from

Summarized from a public post on github.com. See the original ↗

Upgraded prompt

A ready-to-use prompt for this idea, built from research on what makes AI agents do the job right: who the AI should be, the exact steps, and a check to make sure it was done the way you wanted.

1Who the AI should be
2The prompt, with the steps
3The check when it’s done
Upgraded prompts are coming soon.

Try next

Every idea is a real post from someone who tried it, summarized in our words, with a link to the original. App names are swapped for plain words.