Agents

Separate the record check from the asset lookup

A perfectly shaped answer names P-9

Botie proposes diagnosis records. The application needs to tell a malformed record apart from a well-shaped record about an unknown asset.

BOTIE

The answer has nonempty text fields, but P-9 is absent from the registry. Which flags should change relative to the known-asset case?
The inputs we are comparing

Candidate response record

Known asset

{
  "asset": "P-2",
  "diagnosis": "seal wear"
}

An unfamiliar asset

{
  "asset": "P-9",
  "diagnosis": "seal wear"
}

Required field names

Same in both cases

  1. 0asset
  2. 1diagnosis

Known asset IDs

Same in both cases

  1. 0P-2
  2. 1P-3
Result for known asset
  1. 0true
  2. 1true
Choose an explanation to test
The model adds an unexpected approval field

This check uses the pieces from “Keep two different verdicts visible”.

BOTIE

The response still names a known pump and contains a textual diagnosis, but it now includes approved=true. Apply the exact two-field response contract and return the two independent flags.
Candidate response record
{
  "asset": "P-3",
  "diagnosis": "inspect the seal",
  "approved": true
}
Required field names
  1. 0asset
  2. 1diagnosis
Known asset IDs
  1. 0P-3
  2. 1P-4

Use a number, text, or an array matching the requested result. For a matrix, put each row in brackets. Saving your prediction runs your current construction on these inputs and checks the earlier examples too.

Build a construction in the workspace above first. This case will test those pieces.

What can remain wrong when both flags are true?

A structured proposal is ready for further checking, not automatically ready for execution.

This is a small hand-built validator for supplied records. It does not parse model text or check clinical, mechanical, or factual correctness.

Work through the Python challenges →
Continue the courseWhen May Botie Turn a Suggestion into an Action? →
← How Do We Give an Agent a Job It Can Follow?