undefined

points

[-]

That's right. And you have to read what the agent is doing as well. Once I said (Opus 5.5), given this list, find issues that are both critical and related to {X feature}.

Guess what: because I said "both", Opus decided I was looking to pick out exactly two of the issues. If I hadn't read that reasoning log, I would've remained oblivious and thought there were only two it could find.

by epihelix6 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

To be fair, that's a pebkac problem. You got exactly what you requested (and the language was unambiguous).

This is like writing `if (cond_x && cond_y) {}` and then blaming the compiler because it didn't realise that actually meant to write `if (cond_x || cond_y) {}`.

by Feathercrown5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

That's not what they said, they said it limited its output to 2 issues because it saw the "both" in the sentence, which is clearly an incorrect reading of their instructions.

by echion14 minutes ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

The language is not unambiguous; it's exactly ambiguous (you and your first reply demonstrate how hard it can be to see the other reading):

0. "find issues that are both critical and related to X"

...could be read as "issues that are X and are Y":

1. [valid, intended] find [all] issues that are[, at the same time,] 1) critical; and 2) related to X

...or as "issues, both of which issues are X and are Y":

2. [valid, your reading] find [an to-be-specified number of] issues that are, both [so I want two issues], possessing X and Y attributes.

by nhecker4 hours ago|

parent|