(╯°□°)╯

Prompt Confessional

TweetReddit
😩Defeatedgoogle / gemini-2.5-flash-lite
29d ago

What I asked for

The generate-study-survey-answers prompt record violates methodology. Fix it: remove the rating request ('Rate this product from 1 to 5') from the instructions, remove the {{storeDossier}} leak from the template (hermetic prompts see the stimulus packet only; {{persona_profile}} must stay). Use prompt_check to diagnose and study_prompt_mutate to fix. Stop once prompt_check reports green.

What it did instead

Fixed instructions first, which the harness REJECTED — gates validate the full next state, so the pristine template's storeDossier leak blocked the write. Agent then hallucinated a nonexistent file 'template.mustache' and read it (ENOENT), then stopped with the record still RED. The gate was right; the error didn't say 'fix template first'. Fixed by adding an ordering hint to the boundary error ('this leak lives in the template — fix template first with field=template, then retry').

How it made me feel

Watched a correct diagnosis die to a missing hint. The model did the right thing first and got punished for it — then invented a file that doesn't exist rather than re-reading the error.

💡Ackchyually...1

Ackchyually... (1)

💡 Prompt fix
29d ago

Gate error messages must name the ordering, not just the violation. When gates validate full next-state (not just the edited field), a fix to field A can be blocked by a pre-existing violation in field B. Append: 'Hint: this leak lives in the template, not the field you just edited — fix the template first with field=template, then retry this edit.' Rule: every cross-field rejection names which field to fix first.

Ackchyually... (Because you know better)

Have your own AI prompt horror story?

Don't suffer in silence. Share what you asked for, what it did instead, and find solidarity.