Skip to content

[Pune] Prachi Sangaonkar — Vibe Coding Submission#1199

Open
PrachiSangaonkar wants to merge 4 commits intonasscomAI:mainfrom
PrachiSangaonkar:participant/prachi-pune-fixed
Open

[Pune] Prachi Sangaonkar — Vibe Coding Submission#1199
PrachiSangaonkar wants to merge 4 commits intonasscomAI:mainfrom
PrachiSangaonkar:participant/prachi-pune-fixed

Conversation

@PrachiSangaonkar
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Vibe Coding Workshop — Submission PR Draft

Name: Prachi Sangaonkar
City / Group: Pune / Workshop
Date: 2026-04-17
AI tool(s) used: Antigravity (Gemini-based Coding Assistant)

Checklist — Complete Before Opening This PR

[x] agents.md committed for all 4 UCs
[x] skills.md committed for all 4 UCs
[x] classifier.py executes on test_[city].csv without errors
[x] results_[city].csv available in uc-0a/
[x] app.py for UC-0B, UC-0C, UC-X runs successfully
[x] summary_hr_leave.txt included in uc-0b/
[x] growth_output.csv included in uc-0c/
[x] Minimum 4 meaningful commits following the required format
[x] All sections below are completed

UC-0A — Complaint Classifier

Initial failure mode encountered:
Severity blindness. The early version failed to prioritize safety-related keywords like "injury" or "child" when they appeared alongside routine complaints such as potholes or streetlight issues.

Rule that resolved the issue (from agents.md):
"Urgent triggers: Flag as Urgent if the complaint mentions 'injury', 'blood', 'hospital', 'child', or 'doctor' regardless of other keywords."

Accuracy against answer key:
15 out of 15 rows matched.

Handling of severity signals:
Yes. All entries containing terms like "child," "hazard," "injury," or "fell" were correctly classified as Urgent.

Git commit message:
UC-0A Fix severity blindness and taxonomy drift: initial implementation lacked safety keywords and strict categories → implemented rule-based enforcement in classifier.py

UC-0B — Summary That Changes Meaning

Failure mode observed:
Clause omission and obligation softening. For example, Clause 5.2 (dual approval requirement) was reduced to a vague “requires approval.”

Clauses affected in naive output:

*Clause 5.2 (Approval required from BOTH Dept Head and HR Director)
*Clause 2.6 (Leave exceeding 5 days is forfeited)

Post-fix validation:
Yes. All 10 critical clauses are accurately captured with conditions preserved.

Scope bleed in naive prompt:
Yes. It introduced unsupported statements such as “standard leave practices apply.”

Git commit message:
UC-0B Fix clause omission and obligation softening: initial summarizer omitted dual-approval and strict deadlines → implemented strict clause mapping and multi-condition preservation in app.py

UC-0C — Number That Looks Right

Naive output result:
A single overall percentage representing total city-level growth.

Issues observed:

  • Aggregated across all wards
  • Ignored 5 null rows without reporting them

Fix implementation results:

  • Global aggregation is blocked
  • Requires explicit --ward and --category inputs

Handling of null values:
Yes. All null rows are logged and flagged with reasons such as “Audit freeze.”

Validation against reference values:
Yes. Outputs match expected values (Ward 1 Roads: +33.1% in July, −34.8% in October).

Git commit message:
UC-0C Fix aggregation level and silent nulls: initial version aggregated global totals and hid missing data → implemented ward-wise segmentation and mandatory null auditing in app.py

UC-X — Ask My Documents

Naive system response:
"Yes, you can use your personal phone for approved remote tools and work files."
(This incorrectly merged HR and IT policies.)

Issue identified:
Cross-document blending between IT and HR policies.

Corrected system response:
"Answer: Personal devices may be used to access CMC email and the CMC employee self-service portal only. [policy_it_acceptable_use.txt, Section 3.1]"

Use of hedging language:
No. All uncertain responses now follow a strict refusal template.

Test question outcomes:
Yes. All 7 questions resulted in either:

  • A properly cited single-source answer, or
  • The exact refusal template

Git commit message:
[UC-X] Fix cross-document blending and hedged hallucination: implemented single-source retrieval and strict refusal template in app.py

CRAFT Loop Reflection

Most challenging step:
Analyze — It required careful inspection to identify subtle issues like softened legal language or incorrect aggregation logic.

Most important manual addition to agents.md:
The exact Refusal Template for UC-X. Without it, the AI tended to produce vague or misleading responses.

Planned real-world application:
Improving internal technical documentation and onboarding materials by ensuring strict citation of security policies and avoiding unsupported assumptions.

…on lacked safety keywords and strict categories → implemented rule-based enforcement in classifier.py
…r omitted dual-approval and strict deadlines → implemented strict clause mapping and multi-condition preservation in app.py
…ted global totals and hid missing data → implemented ward-wise segmentation and mandatory null auditing in app.py
…ted single-source retrieval and strict refusal template in app.py
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

👋 Hi there, participant! Thanks for joining our Vibe Coding Session!

We're reviewing your PR for the 4 User Cases. Once your submission is validated and merged, you'll be awarded your completion badge! 🏆

Next Steps:

  • Make sure all 4 UCs are finished.
  • Ensure your commit messages match the required format.
  • Good luck!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant