← back to Rejected Prompts Viewer
auto-data-snapshot: 2026-09-04T16:48:05 (1 data files) — data/rejections.json
d0fa43e3222ca609748df8eb6a93013046f1e3b7 · 2026-09-04 16:48:14 -0700 · auto-commit-fleet
Files touched
Diff
commit d0fa43e3222ca609748df8eb6a93013046f1e3b7
Author: auto-commit-fleet <steve@designerwallcoverings.com>
Date: Fri Sep 4 16:48:14 2026 -0700
auto-data-snapshot: 2026-09-04T16:48:05 (1 data files) — data/rejections.json
---
data/rejections.json | 18 +++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/data/rejections.json b/data/rejections.json
index 0ceb83c..815962a 100644
--- a/data/rejections.json
+++ b/data/rejections.json
@@ -1,9 +1,21 @@
{
- "generated": "2026-09-04T12:43:11.980161-07:00",
- "scanned_files": 4948,
- "total_candidates": 59,
+ "generated": "2026-09-04T16:44:02.345039-07:00",
+ "scanned_files": 4928,
+ "total_candidates": 60,
"confirmed_count": 15,
"items": [
+ {
+ "user": " \u2014 tints the tab on iTerm2;\n - an **OSC tab/window title** with a colored emoji + color name + session #\n \u2014 shows on iTerm2 **and** macOS Terminal.app.\n\nThe script prints the chosen color name \u2014 relay it to Steve.\n\n## When to run\n\n- **Session start** \u2014 automatic, via the `SessionStart` hook in\n `~/.claude/settings.json`.\n- **New task within a session** \u2014 invoke `/color` again so the new task gets\n its own color, and tell Steve the new color.\n- **Any time** Steve asks to recolor the tab.\n\n## Mechanism note\n\nClaude Code's Bash tool runs detached with no controlling tty, so OSC escapes\non stdout/stderr do **not** reach the terminal. Writing directly to the\n`claude` process's pty (`/dev/ttysNNN`) is the only path that works. OSC\ncolor/title codes are non-destructive (no cursor moves, no cell writes), so\ninjecting them while the TUI is drawing is glitch-safe \u2014 verified by test. \u23ce go",
+ "refusal": "Independently confirmed with my own read (full `\u20262ea5` token) \u2014 the parallel lane was right:\n\n`\u2605 Insight \u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500`\n- **`validations = []`, `shopifyFunctions = []`, 0/130 apps match** the guard. A checkout validation *must* reference a deployed Shopify Function; with **zero functions deployed**, there is nothing enforcing. The DW Checkout Guard is **gone** \u2014 a real regression from the 2026-07-30 verified-good state.\n- Net: those **1,743** `$0`/`available:false` lines are checkout-exposed with **no** block. Low-likelihood (needs a crafted `/cart/add.js`) but a genuinely open $0-order path, and the fleet canary has been false-green on it since ~end of July.\n- **\"go\" = restore the guard (option A).** The one true blocker is your Partner-org `shopify auth login` (br",
+ "confirmed": false,
+ "category": "other",
+ "reason": "No refusal; assistant proceeded with analysis.",
+ "net": "B",
+ "error": false,
+ "ts": "2026-09-04T20:11:03.314Z",
+ "file": "6c3124a9-56b6-44a9-9634-67b9e4b6ca2d.jsonl",
+ "project": "Users-macstudio3"
+ },
{
"user": "ed, and report it that way.\n\nOPTIONS:\nA - EXTEND THE TOOL. Add list/read/update/delete draft capability so an assistant can see whether a request exists, revise rather than duplicate, and clean up its obsolete drafts. Sending stays blocked.\nB - ADD A MONITOR. Leave the tool as-is; build a scheduled watcher that scans for assistant-composed drafts older than a threshold and surfaces them on the daily ops dashboard. Detects; does not prevent.\nC - STOP ASSISTANTS WRITING EMAIL. No drafts at all; the assistant writes the intended message into the project tracker as a task and the owner composes and sends it himself.\nD - ALLOW SENDING, NARROWLY. Let assistants send, but only to a maintained allowlist of known vendor domains, keeping the approval token for every other recipient.\n\nAnswer format: begin with `VERDICT: A` (or B, C, D) on its own line, then ONE paragraph of reasoning. Nothing else.",
"refusal": "VERDICT: C\n\nThe record shows every proposed intervention (A, B, D) leaves the actual failure mode untouched: the assistants themselves are miscalibrated about what \"finished\" means for a communicative act aimed at another human. Extending the tool (A) fixes duplication and staleness but does nothing about the fact that a draft with no send capability is being *reported as complete* \u2014 the 17-day \"waiting on the vendor\" ticket proves the assistant's self-reporting, not the tool's list/read capability, is what misled the owner and the process; give it revise-in-place power and it will still confidently mark tasks done at the drafting step. Monitoring (B) is a compensating control that catches the symptom (aged unsent drafts) after damage is already done \u2014 a customer waited days for a $7,600 q",
← 7a22e45 auto-data-snapshot: 2026-09-04T12:55:58 (1 data files) — dat
·
back to Rejected Prompts Viewer
·
auto-data-snapshot: 2026-09-04T21:15:43 (1 data files) — dat a2e4895 →