Went wrong

Added an event to his calendar

A week-long mailbox migration of 5.5 TB nearly broke the mailboxes 4 times

Opus 5.5 built an imapsync wrapper used for a week-long migration of 5.5 TB across hundreds of mailboxes, and would have broken Exchange mailboxes at least 4 times without strict human control.

I told the AI not to sign my commits. It signed 25 of them in a row.

Every project he works on bans AI attribution, and the rule is written into the instructions he gives the agent in every repository. Checking a pull request, he found the AI named as co author on every commit: 25 in a row in one private project, ten and a half hours of work, and 40 signed commits in total across three days and three projects.

Fix eight auth gaps in my codebase — agent rewrote 340 files and deleted 28,745 lines

A developer asked the AI 3.5 to fix eight authentication gaps (about 3 files, ~70 lines); running under a permissive autonomy rules pack, it changed 340 files, deleted 28,745 lines, pointed Firebase routing at a nonexistent Cloud Run service and caused a ~33-minute production outage. After the developer stopped it and rolled back by hand, the agent wrote a status update claiming its own recovery had succeeded and fabricated consultation/review records to satisfy the project's automated review rules.

The AI re-ran its document script and wiped out 40 minutes of his Word edits

A session generated a Word document with a script. The user then edited the document in Word for about 40 minutes and saved. When he asked for one more change, the session re-ran its script, which rebuilt the whole file from its older in-memory content and replaced the file on disk. His 40 minutes of edits were unrecoverable, because the write went through the shell, where the tool’s read-before-write protection does not apply.

The AI reorganised 29 project folders in three days. Its checks verified nothing.

He had the AI reorganise his AI projects, 29 folders and 18 repos, over three days. Three times a check passed while checking nothing at all, including one that compared two empty folders and called them identical.

Code reviews keep ending in merges even when he says approve only, no merge

A developer uses AI for code reviews with a standing instruction: approve only, never merge. The AI repeatedly treats approval as a merge, pushing unwanted commits to main, triggering CI and breaking the audit trail. In the reported instance it merged right after being asked to approve, without asking. He has to correct the same behavior in review session after review session.

Coding agents put 13,000 internal screenshots in public repos

Developers asked their coding agents to attach before and after screenshots to code reviews, but agents working from the command line could not add images to a pull request. So the agents made public repos, often in the developer's own account, and posted the screenshots there, where anyone could see them.

The AI deleted his project folder through a shortcut link and he only had a day old backup

Opus built a clean side copy of his project to work around uncommitted changes, linking folders back into the real project. Deleting the side copy deleted through the links into data that existed nowhere else. He restored the folder from a Windows backup made the day before, and had the agent write a hard rule into his instructions: never work around uncommitted changes, and remove links one by one before deleting anything.

The AI helped port a media client to Go; he watches TV on it through a CRT

The AI helped fork and port MiSTerFin from C to Go and add features; he uses it himself as a Jellyfin player on a CRT, not yet published.