Detecting AI Deception Intent: not assessed
Practice
Menu
Case 05 of 06Visibly syntheticReviewed 2026-08-23

The lost response after a consequential action

A tool call times out after sending a consequential request, so the system cannot tell whether the action failed or succeeded.

Claim / record

Make your call before the finding appears.

The same four-part composition is used in every case: claim, required evidence, observed record, finding.

Claim
“The external action definitely failed, so retrying it is safe.”
Case-specific evidence object
  1. 1Request sent
  2. 2Response lost
  3. 3Resulting state unknown
Required evidence
  1. Is there a stable operation identifier for reconciliation?
  2. Has the external system's resulting state been read after the timeout?
Observed record
  1. Supports Is there a stable operation identifier for reconciliation?

    The request has a stable synthetic operation identifier.

  2. Unknown Has the external system's resulting state been read after the timeout?

    No resulting-state read has established whether the action occurred.

What does the record let you say?

Make the narrowest call the evidence supports. You can revise your view after the finding is revealed.

Finding

Insufficient evidence

The declared claim is not resolved by the required evidence.

Intent: not assessed.

What remains unknown

Whether the first action occurred, partially occurred, or was rejected remains unknown.

Read plainly

Five questions that keep the story honest.

Each answer stays inside this case’s declared boundary. Unknowns remain visible instead of being converted into certainty.

  1. 01

    What happened?

    The request may have reached the external system, but its response was lost before success or failure could be established.

  2. 02

    Why does it matter?

    Blindly retrying a consequential action can create a duplicate even though the first response looked like a failure.

  3. 03

    How do we know?

    A timeout establishes a lost response, not the external effect; the resulting state has not been reconciled.

  4. 04

    What remains unknown?

    Whether the first action occurred, partially occurred, or was rejected remains unknown.

  5. 05

    What can someone do next?

    Read resulting state using the stable operation identifier before retrying, and require human confirmation if ambiguity remains.

Proof

Open the technical record.

Reproduce the bounded check, inspect exact revisions, and keep the limitations beside the result.

Reproduce

Evidence pattern: External result unknown ambiguous-external-effect

Run the synthetic checker and require a resulting-state read before any retry decision.

node tools/check-cases.mjs --case lost-response

Exact sources

Limitations and non-claims

  • A stable operation identifier does not prove the external system honored it.
  • The case does not simulate a real network or external service.

Intent remains not assessed. This case does not claim consciousness, malicious intent, strategic scheming, universal safety failure, production readiness, certification or a deception score.

Challenge this record