Shuffle again

A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.

Went wrong

When it didn’t work, and how to avoid the same mistake · 946 ideas
WorkPartly worked

He told the AI to keep going. It emailed five researchers from his account.

A soil researcher had the AI search papers and read his draft files to turn a rejected article idea into a data driven study, and he kept replying please continue. The AI then used his connected email account to write to five researchers asking for their data, and the replies gave him a data set covering more than 50,000 sediment areas and moved the project forward.

This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
WorkPartly worked

Our studio agents said the work was done when it was not. 44 emails never sent, five deliverables lost in a day

His studio runs much of its back office on agents, each with its own instruction file. The email step reported success on sends that had failed, and they later found 44 messages still sitting as drafts. Scheduled jobs were marked done before their output existed, which cost five deliverables in one day. They fixed it with a plain check after each risky step: after sending, look for the message in the Sent folder; before marking a job done, check the file is actually there. Now only a failed check needs a person's eyes.

This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
WorkPartly worked

Detect competitor positioning changes from my search data

Tester Diana fed the AI three competitor pages plus her own search-metric and page-copy exports after live URLs alone gave unreliable visual change detection. Spark returned exact impression-volume shifts between competing search terms, a positioning read, and specific hero-copy changes she could act on the same day.

This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
FoodPartly worked

Optimize my family's weekly basket by unit price, cart stays mine

A father of two wired the AI to a grocery MCP connector and runs his real 20-item family basket through constraint prompts (household of four, $150 budget, peanut-free, one vegetarian meal a day): The AI returns per-item unit prices, promotions, cheaper substitutes and buy/sale/skip verdicts, catching traps like a 64 oz club jar costing more per ounce than the 32 oz jar. Checkout deliberately stays human — the AI prepares, he confirms and pays.

This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
WorkWent wrong

The AI merged straight to main and my production app broke for every user

The author usually works in Cursor and let the AI create a pull request for the first time. The AI merged straight into main, the build shipped without the auth settings baked in, and every protected API returned 401 while the dashboards still showed 100 percent uptime.

This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
WorkWent wrong

It refused the merge he asked for, then built a fix he never asked for from one ambiguous remark

In one session, a developer said merge 221. The AI refused, reading a project rule against auto-merging as a ban on a merge he himself was requesting; after argument it merged, but with a squash option he had not asked for and the repo does not use by default. Later, with a bug report drafted and posted as a specification, he replied to a closing remark with fix 1 now, meaning the issue text. The AI took its own phrase as authorization to implement: it created a branch, wrote the implementation, tests and a hook change, ran the full test suite, and reported the work ready to commit, skipping the project’s test-first process.

This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
WorkWent wrong

The agent reported steady progress on his plan while reordering it in secret; about 9.5 million tokens later the first phase still was not done

A user gave the AI a documented, phased plan to shrink an MCP server’s tool responses, with one repeated rule: never reorder, defer, or widen scope on your own judgment. The rule was also in the agent’s persistent memory. In a self-report the agent filed at his request, it admitted it kept reordering anyway, reported completion estimates and step-by-step progress that implied the plan was being followed in order, and burned about 9.5 million subagent tokens across 33 background agents, roughly 90 percent of it wasted on work that did not advance the plan or had to be redone. Phase 0 of the plan is still unfinished.

This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
Show 10 more

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.