Vibe Coding Workshop — Submission PR

Name: Desh Deepak Yadav
TechM Group: TechM Vibe Coding Workshop
Date: 20 Apr 2026
AI tool(s) used: Github Copilot

Checklist — Complete Before Opening This PR

• agents.md committed for all 4 UCs
• skills.md committed for all 4 UCs
• classifier.py runs on test_[city].csv without crash
• results_[city].csv present in uc-0a/
• app.py for UC-0B, UC-0C, UC-X — all run without crash
• summary_hr_leave.txt present in uc-0b/
• growth_output.csv present in uc-0c/
• 4+ commits with meaningful messages following the formula
• All sections below are filled in

UC-0A — Complaint Classifier

Which failure mode did you encounter first?
(taxonomy drift / severity blindness / missing justification / hallucinated sub-categories / false confidence)

Taxonomy drift

What enforcement rule fixed it? Quote the rule exactly as it appears in your agents.md:

Category must be exactly one of: Pothole, Flooding, Streetlight, Waste, Noise, Road Damage, Heritage Damage, Heat Hazard, Drain Blockage, Other — no variations or additional categories allowed.

How many rows in your results CSV match the answer key?
(Tutor will release answer key after session)

15 out of 15

Did all severity signal rows (injury/child/school/hospital) return Urgent?

No

Your git commit message for UC-0A:

UC-0A Fix Complaint Classifier: function missing → Classifier function added

UC-0B — Summary That Changes Meaning

Which failure mode did you encounter?
(clause omission / scope bleed / obligation softening)

[Your answer]

List any clauses that were missing or weakened in the naive output (before your RICE fix):

[Your answer — reference clause numbers]

After your fix — are all 10 critical clauses present in summary_hr_leave.txt?

Yes / No — [which are still missing or wrong]

Did the naive prompt add any information not in the source document (scope bleed)?

Yes / No — [quote any bleed you found]

Your git commit message for UC-0B:

[paste your commit message here]

UC-0C — Number That Looks Right

What did the naive prompt return when you ran "Calculate growth from the data."?

[Your answer — quote the output]

Did it aggregate across all wards? Did it mention the 5 null rows?

[Your answer]

After your fix — does your system refuse all-ward aggregation?

Yes / No

Does your growth_output.csv flag the 5 null rows rather than skipping them?

Yes / No — [list which rows are flagged]

Does your output match the reference values (Ward 1 Roads +33.1% in July, −34.8% in October)?

Yes / No — [note any discrepancy]

Your git commit message for UC-0C:

[paste your commit message here]

UC-X — Ask My Documents

What did the naive prompt return for the cross-document test question?
(Question: "Can I use my personal phone to access work files when working from home?")

[Quote the actual output]

Did it blend the IT and HR policies?

Yes / No — [explain]

After your fix — what does your system return for this question?

[Quote the actual output]

Did your system use any hedging phrases in any answer?
("while not explicitly covered", "typically", "generally understood")

Yes / No — [quote any you found]

Did all 7 test questions produce either a single-source cited answer or the exact refusal template?

Yes / No — [list any that failed]

Your git commit message for UC-X:

[paste your commit message here]

CRAFT Loop Reflection

Which CRAFT step was hardest across all UCs, and why?

[Your answer — 2–3 sentences]

What is the single most important thing you added manually to an agents.md that the AI did not generate on its own?

[Your answer — be specific, quote the rule]

Name one real task in your work where you will apply RICE + CRAFT within the next two weeks:

[Your answer]

Reviewer Notes (tutor fills this section)

Badge decision:

• Standard badge — meets pass threshold (score 11+/20 on this review, full rubric 22+/40)
• Distinction badge — meets distinction threshold (score 17+/20 on this review, full rubric 34+/40)
• Not yet — resubmit after addressing: _______________