Yeah, things are starting to go downhill. I told it up front that I'd be adding custom rules, so it shouldn't use some out-of-the-box chess solution that wouldn't handle customization, but it chose to do so anyway and is building on chess.js.

Now I told it to modify the rules to let pawns be on the back row. It did, but now the server crashes since it's an invalid position. Claude decided to "fix" this error by silently reverting my instruction and disallowing pawns on the back row, despite that being the whole point of the game.

I asked it to fix this and it told me it did, but the pawns are still banned from the back row. I'm now telling it again to fix this...

@IsaacKing It has hallucinated that there's a flaw in its randomization logic, rather than remember its own feature it just added like 3 prompts ago where it disallowed pawns on the back row.

(The game is like chess 960 but even more random, pawns can go anywhere.)

@IsaacKing And now it's flat-out refusing to do what I ask, saying its hands are tied due to the restrictions of chess.js, which I told it not to use!

Gone through a few more cycles of "please make the pawn position random" "ok I have made the pawn position random" "no, you didn't, please actually do it". Giving up hope...

Claude is now telling me it is MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to place pawns on the first rank

Trying to get it deployed but I have to wait on DNS propagation, worst part

Lol, I asked it to add a move sound and it's generating the audio signature itself rather than finding a sound effect on the internet.

Going pretty well so far, we have a local version that works, albeit with lots of little bugs. (e.g. nothing happens when the timer hits 0.) So far Claude has been consistently able to fix these bugs when I point them out though.

Does "play vs AI" have to exist and be good in order to resolve YES?

@CraigDemel Hmm, good question, that's probably the hardest part. I'm inclined to say it's allowed to just handle implementation, and I can provide the AI's strategy.