Module 9's lab runs against the carried-forward tasks-app, but two example issues describe already-implemented work. Issue 2 ("Add a delete command") was built and committed in Module 4 and falsely asserts the app has "only add, list, and done." Issue 3 ("Support task priorities") is framed as an undesigned open question, but Module 6's lab already implemented exactly those decisions (levels, --priority, list re-sort). A carry-forward learner sees these already present and is confused.
Evidence
modules/09-issues-and-the-task-layer/lab/example-issues.md (~lines 54-55): "There's no way to remove a task once added — only add, list, and done." Contradicted by Module 4 committing a delete command (verify.sh; README ~lines 353/401) and Module 6 implementing priorities.
(Note: Module 6's priorities/count/clear live on an experiment branch whose merge to main is conditional — so the delete contradiction is the strongest, and the count/clear claim should not be overstated.)
Why it matters
Factual contradictions within the course's own materials, against carry-forward integrity. The delete/priorities examples are load-bearing (reused in the README's routing-heuristic prose).
Proposed change
Minimum fix (preserves the worked examples):
Drop Issue 2's false absolute claim ("only add, list, and done / no way to remove a task").
Soften Issue 3's already-answered questions; frame the issues from the project's earlier state.
Add a one-line note that delete/priorities may already exist from earlier modules.
(Shipping a pinned starter-state snapshot like M10/M13 is awkward here because M9's lab runs against the learner's pushed forge repo, not a local snapshot.)
Acceptance criteria
Issue 2 no longer states the app lacks delete / has only add/list/done.
Issue 3 no longer presents already-implemented decisions as open questions.
A note acknowledges some features may already exist from earlier modules.
Affected files
modules/09-issues-and-the-task-layer/lab/example-issues.md (and README note if needed)
References
Source finding F23 (realVotes 3/3).
Filed from an adversarial multi-agent course review (217 raw findings → 54 adversarially-verified survivors). Scoped for manual review; intentionally not auto-assigned to an agent.
## Problem
Module 9's lab runs against the carried-forward `tasks-app`, but two example issues describe already-implemented work. Issue 2 ("Add a delete command") was built and committed in Module 4 and falsely asserts the app has "only add, list, and done." Issue 3 ("Support task priorities") is framed as an undesigned open question, but Module 6's lab already implemented exactly those decisions (levels, `--priority`, list re-sort). A carry-forward learner sees these already present and is confused.
## Evidence
`modules/09-issues-and-the-task-layer/lab/example-issues.md` (~lines 54-55): "There's no way to remove a task once added — only `add`, `list`, and `done`." Contradicted by Module 4 committing a `delete` command (`verify.sh`; README ~lines 353/401) and Module 6 implementing priorities.
(Note: Module 6's priorities/count/clear live on an experiment branch whose merge to `main` is conditional — so the `delete` contradiction is the strongest, and the count/clear claim should not be overstated.)
## Why it matters
Factual contradictions within the course's own materials, against carry-forward integrity. The delete/priorities examples are load-bearing (reused in the README's routing-heuristic prose).
## Proposed change
Minimum fix (preserves the worked examples):
1. Drop Issue 2's false absolute claim ("only add, list, and done / no way to remove a task").
2. Soften Issue 3's already-answered questions; frame the issues from the project's earlier state.
3. Add a one-line note that delete/priorities may already exist from earlier modules.
(Shipping a pinned starter-state snapshot like M10/M13 is awkward here because M9's lab runs against the learner's pushed forge repo, not a local snapshot.)
## Acceptance criteria
- [ ] Issue 2 no longer states the app lacks delete / has only add/list/done.
- [ ] Issue 3 no longer presents already-implemented decisions as open questions.
- [ ] A note acknowledges some features may already exist from earlier modules.
## Affected files
- `modules/09-issues-and-the-task-layer/lab/example-issues.md` (and README note if needed)
## References
Source finding F23 (realVotes 3/3).
---
*Filed from an adversarial multi-agent course review (217 raw findings → 54 adversarially-verified survivors). Scoped for manual review; intentionally not auto-assigned to an agent.*
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Problem
Module 9's lab runs against the carried-forward
tasks-app, but two example issues describe already-implemented work. Issue 2 ("Add a delete command") was built and committed in Module 4 and falsely asserts the app has "only add, list, and done." Issue 3 ("Support task priorities") is framed as an undesigned open question, but Module 6's lab already implemented exactly those decisions (levels,--priority, list re-sort). A carry-forward learner sees these already present and is confused.Evidence
modules/09-issues-and-the-task-layer/lab/example-issues.md(~lines 54-55): "There's no way to remove a task once added — onlyadd,list, anddone." Contradicted by Module 4 committing adeletecommand (verify.sh; README ~lines 353/401) and Module 6 implementing priorities.(Note: Module 6's priorities/count/clear live on an experiment branch whose merge to
mainis conditional — so thedeletecontradiction is the strongest, and the count/clear claim should not be overstated.)Why it matters
Factual contradictions within the course's own materials, against carry-forward integrity. The delete/priorities examples are load-bearing (reused in the README's routing-heuristic prose).
Proposed change
Minimum fix (preserves the worked examples):
(Shipping a pinned starter-state snapshot like M10/M13 is awkward here because M9's lab runs against the learner's pushed forge repo, not a local snapshot.)
Acceptance criteria
Affected files
modules/09-issues-and-the-task-layer/lab/example-issues.md(and README note if needed)References
Source finding F23 (realVotes 3/3).
Filed from an adversarial multi-agent course review (217 raw findings → 54 adversarially-verified survivors). Scoped for manual review; intentionally not auto-assigned to an agent.