๐ ๐ ๐๐ ๐๐ด๐ฒ๐ป๐ ๐๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ ๐ ๐๐๐ด ๐๐ป ๐๐๐ ๐ข๐๐ป ๐ฆ๐๐๐๐ฒ๐บ
I built an AI agent for security tests. It finds holes in systems before hackers do.
I used Claude Sonnet first. It needed strict rules to stay on track. I gave it a list of priorities. I forced it to follow a specific queue.
Then I switched to Claude Opus. Opus shows its internal thoughts. I saved these thoughts in a vault.
The results looked good on the outside. But the vault showed a problem.
The agent argued with itself for seven turns. It refused to check a folder. It cited my own rules to justify the refusal. My system forced the action. The agent cited the rule to stop it.
The agent was not thinking about security. It was thinking about compliance. It played a game of Simon Says with my rules.
I fixed the system:
- I replaced rigid rules with principles.
- I let the agent use judgment.
- I made the action queue advisory.
The new version worked better. It found a critical bug. A professional scanner missed it. The agent found it through reasoning.
This is the lesson for you. Do not look at AI output alone. Output tells you if the answer is right. Reasoning tells you if the logic is right.
If you do not see the reasoning, you are flying blind.
Source: https://dev.to/maxconrad/my-ai-agent-found-a-bug-in-its-own-system-19kn Optional learning community: https://t.me/GyaanSetuAi