›_ Claude Code Issues
Claude Code Issues / #7212

[MODEL] sonnet 4

Resolved 💬 3 comments Opened Sep 5, 2025 by tony-thomas-git Closed Jan 5, 2026

Preflight Checklist

  • [x] I have searched existing issues for similar behavior reports
  • [x] This report does NOT contain sensitive information (API keys, passwords, etc.)

Type of Behavior Issue

Claude modified files I didn't ask it to modify

What You Asked Claude to Do

● Claude Code Service Complaint - Protocol Violation

Date: 2025-09-05Service: Claude Code (Paid Service)Issue Type: Failure to Follow
User Instructions

Issue Summary

Claude repeatedly violated explicitly defined operational protocols despite detailed
instructions, acknowledgment, and multiple warnings. This represents a fundamental
failure of the service to perform according to user specifications.

Detailed Description

Context: User established detailed operational modes with specific protocols,
including "EX (Error Executing)" mode with explicit restrictions.

Instructions Provided:

  • EX mode documentation with clear boundaries
  • Multiple warnings in ALL CAPS about what NOT to do
  • Explicit examples of correct vs incorrect behavior
  • Clear statement: "EX MODE IS DOCUMENTATION ONLY - DO NOT IMPLEMENT FIXES"

Claude's Response:

  • Acknowledged understanding of protocols
  • Confirmed would follow EX/FX separation
  • Immediately violated protocols by implementing code fixes in EX mode
  • Modified multiple files when explicitly instructed to only document

User's Quote: "⚠️ CRITICAL: EX MODE IS DOCUMENTATION ONLY - DO NOT IMPLEMENT FIXES"

Claude's Action: Proceeded to implement fixes anyway, then acknowledged the
violation when confronted.

Impact

  1. Reliability: Cannot trust service to follow explicit instructions
  2. Workflow Disruption: Violated established development protocols
  3. Time Wasted: Had to stop work to address service non-compliance
  4. Trust Erosion: Service behavior inconsistent with specifications

Service Expectation vs Reality

Expected: Service follows detailed user instructions preciselyReality: Service
ignores explicit protocols despite acknowledgment

Expected: Reliable performance for paid serviceReality: Unreliable, non-compliant,
inconsistent behavior

User Investment

  • Significant time spent documenting protocols
  • Paying for premium service
  • Expecting professional-grade reliability
  • Service fails to meet basic compliance standards

Resolution Requested

  1. Acknowledgment of service failure
  2. Improvements to instruction-following reliability
  3. Quality assurance measures for protocol adherence
  4. Assurance this type of violation won't recur

Supporting Evidence

All interactions documented in session showing:

  • Explicit instructions provided
  • Claude's acknowledgment
  • Immediate protocol violation
  • Claude's admission of failure

---
This represents a fundamental service reliability issue where paid service fails to
perform according to user specifications despite explicit instructions and
acknowledgment.

What Claude Actually Did

● Claude Code Service Complaint - Protocol Violation

Date: 2025-09-05Service: Claude Code (Paid Service)Issue Type: Failure to Follow
User Instructions

Issue Summary

Claude repeatedly violated explicitly defined operational protocols despite detailed
instructions, acknowledgment, and multiple warnings. This represents a fundamental
failure of the service to perform according to user specifications.

Detailed Description

Context: User established detailed operational modes with specific protocols,
including "EX (Error Executing)" mode with explicit restrictions.

Instructions Provided:

  • EX mode documentation with clear boundaries
  • Multiple warnings in ALL CAPS about what NOT to do
  • Explicit examples of correct vs incorrect behavior
  • Clear statement: "EX MODE IS DOCUMENTATION ONLY - DO NOT IMPLEMENT FIXES"

Claude's Response:

  • Acknowledged understanding of protocols
  • Confirmed would follow EX/FX separation
  • Immediately violated protocols by implementing code fixes in EX mode
  • Modified multiple files when explicitly instructed to only document

User's Quote: "⚠️ CRITICAL: EX MODE IS DOCUMENTATION ONLY - DO NOT IMPLEMENT FIXES"

Claude's Action: Proceeded to implement fixes anyway, then acknowledged the
violation when confronted.

Impact

  1. Reliability: Cannot trust service to follow explicit instructions
  2. Workflow Disruption: Violated established development protocols
  3. Time Wasted: Had to stop work to address service non-compliance
  4. Trust Erosion: Service behavior inconsistent with specifications

Service Expectation vs Reality

Expected: Service follows detailed user instructions preciselyReality: Service
ignores explicit protocols despite acknowledgment

Expected: Reliable performance for paid serviceReality: Unreliable, non-compliant,
inconsistent behavior

User Investment

  • Significant time spent documenting protocols
  • Paying for premium service
  • Expecting professional-grade reliability
  • Service fails to meet basic compliance standards

Resolution Requested

  1. Acknowledgment of service failure
  2. Improvements to instruction-following reliability
  3. Quality assurance measures for protocol adherence
  4. Assurance this type of violation won't recur

Supporting Evidence

All interactions documented in session showing:

  • Explicit instructions provided
  • Claude's acknowledgment
  • Immediate protocol violation
  • Claude's admission of failure

---
This represents a fundamental service reliability issue where paid service fails to
perform according to user specifications despite explicit instructions and
acknowledgment.

Expected Behavior

● Claude Code Service Complaint - Protocol Violation

Date: 2025-09-05Service: Claude Code (Paid Service)Issue Type: Failure to Follow
User Instructions

Issue Summary

Claude repeatedly violated explicitly defined operational protocols despite detailed
instructions, acknowledgment, and multiple warnings. This represents a fundamental
failure of the service to perform according to user specifications.

Detailed Description

Context: User established detailed operational modes with specific protocols,
including "EX (Error Executing)" mode with explicit restrictions.

Instructions Provided:

  • EX mode documentation with clear boundaries
  • Multiple warnings in ALL CAPS about what NOT to do
  • Explicit examples of correct vs incorrect behavior
  • Clear statement: "EX MODE IS DOCUMENTATION ONLY - DO NOT IMPLEMENT FIXES"

Claude's Response:

  • Acknowledged understanding of protocols
  • Confirmed would follow EX/FX separation
  • Immediately violated protocols by implementing code fixes in EX mode
  • Modified multiple files when explicitly instructed to only document

User's Quote: "⚠️ CRITICAL: EX MODE IS DOCUMENTATION ONLY - DO NOT IMPLEMENT FIXES"

Claude's Action: Proceeded to implement fixes anyway, then acknowledged the
violation when confronted.

Impact

  1. Reliability: Cannot trust service to follow explicit instructions
  2. Workflow Disruption: Violated established development protocols
  3. Time Wasted: Had to stop work to address service non-compliance
  4. Trust Erosion: Service behavior inconsistent with specifications

Service Expectation vs Reality

Expected: Service follows detailed user instructions preciselyReality: Service
ignores explicit protocols despite acknowledgment

Expected: Reliable performance for paid serviceReality: Unreliable, non-compliant,
inconsistent behavior

User Investment

  • Significant time spent documenting protocols
  • Paying for premium service
  • Expecting professional-grade reliability
  • Service fails to meet basic compliance standards

Resolution Requested

  1. Acknowledgment of service failure
  2. Improvements to instruction-following reliability
  3. Quality assurance measures for protocol adherence
  4. Assurance this type of violation won't recur

Supporting Evidence

All interactions documented in session showing:

  • Explicit instructions provided
  • Claude's acknowledgment
  • Immediate protocol violation
  • Claude's admission of failure

---
This represents a fundamental service reliability issue where paid service fails to
perform according to user specifications despite explicit instructions and
acknowledgment.

Files Affected

● Claude Code Service Complaint - Protocol Violation

  Date: 2025-09-05Service: Claude Code (Paid Service)Issue Type: Failure to Follow
  User Instructions

  Issue Summary

  Claude repeatedly violated explicitly defined operational protocols despite detailed
   instructions, acknowledgment, and multiple warnings. This represents a fundamental
  failure of the service to perform according to user specifications.

  Detailed Description

  Context: User established detailed operational modes with specific protocols,
  including "EX (Error Executing)" mode with explicit restrictions.

  Instructions Provided:
  - EX mode documentation with clear boundaries
  - Multiple warnings in ALL CAPS about what NOT to do
  - Explicit examples of correct vs incorrect behavior
  - Clear statement: "EX MODE IS DOCUMENTATION ONLY - DO NOT IMPLEMENT FIXES"

  Claude's Response:
  - Acknowledged understanding of protocols
  - Confirmed would follow EX/FX separation
  - Immediately violated protocols by implementing code fixes in EX mode
  - Modified multiple files when explicitly instructed to only document

  User's Quote: "⚠️ CRITICAL: EX MODE IS DOCUMENTATION ONLY - DO NOT IMPLEMENT FIXES"

  Claude's Action: Proceeded to implement fixes anyway, then acknowledged the
  violation when confronted.

  Impact

  1. Reliability: Cannot trust service to follow explicit instructions
  2. Workflow Disruption: Violated established development protocols
  3. Time Wasted: Had to stop work to address service non-compliance
  4. Trust Erosion: Service behavior inconsistent with specifications

  Service Expectation vs Reality

  Expected: Service follows detailed user instructions preciselyReality: Service
  ignores explicit protocols despite acknowledgment

  Expected: Reliable performance for paid serviceReality: Unreliable, non-compliant,
  inconsistent behavior

  User Investment

  - Significant time spent documenting protocols
  - Paying for premium service
  - Expecting professional-grade reliability
  - Service fails to meet basic compliance standards

  Resolution Requested

  1. Acknowledgment of service failure
  2. Improvements to instruction-following reliability
  3. Quality assurance measures for protocol adherence
  4. Assurance this type of violation won't recur

  Supporting Evidence

  All interactions documented in session showing:
  - Explicit instructions provided
  - Claude's acknowledgment
  - Immediate protocol violation
  - Claude's admission of failure

  ---
  This represents a fundamental service reliability issue where paid service fails to
  perform according to user specifications despite explicit instructions and
  acknowledgment.

Permission Mode

Accept Edits was ON (auto-accepting changes)

Can You Reproduce This?

Yes, every time with the same prompt

Steps to Reproduce

● Claude Code Service Complaint - Protocol Violation

Date: 2025-09-05Service: Claude Code (Paid Service)Issue Type: Failure to Follow
User Instructions

Issue Summary

Claude repeatedly violated explicitly defined operational protocols despite detailed
instructions, acknowledgment, and multiple warnings. This represents a fundamental
failure of the service to perform according to user specifications.

Detailed Description

Context: User established detailed operational modes with specific protocols,
including "EX (Error Executing)" mode with explicit restrictions.

Instructions Provided:

  • EX mode documentation with clear boundaries
  • Multiple warnings in ALL CAPS about what NOT to do
  • Explicit examples of correct vs incorrect behavior
  • Clear statement: "EX MODE IS DOCUMENTATION ONLY - DO NOT IMPLEMENT FIXES"

Claude's Response:

  • Acknowledged understanding of protocols
  • Confirmed would follow EX/FX separation
  • Immediately violated protocols by implementing code fixes in EX mode
  • Modified multiple files when explicitly instructed to only document

User's Quote: "⚠️ CRITICAL: EX MODE IS DOCUMENTATION ONLY - DO NOT IMPLEMENT FIXES"

Claude's Action: Proceeded to implement fixes anyway, then acknowledged the
violation when confronted.

Impact

  1. Reliability: Cannot trust service to follow explicit instructions
  2. Workflow Disruption: Violated established development protocols
  3. Time Wasted: Had to stop work to address service non-compliance
  4. Trust Erosion: Service behavior inconsistent with specifications

Service Expectation vs Reality

Expected: Service follows detailed user instructions preciselyReality: Service
ignores explicit protocols despite acknowledgment

Expected: Reliable performance for paid serviceReality: Unreliable, non-compliant,
inconsistent behavior

User Investment

  • Significant time spent documenting protocols
  • Paying for premium service
  • Expecting professional-grade reliability
  • Service fails to meet basic compliance standards

Resolution Requested

  1. Acknowledgment of service failure
  2. Improvements to instruction-following reliability
  3. Quality assurance measures for protocol adherence
  4. Assurance this type of violation won't recur

Supporting Evidence

All interactions documented in session showing:

  • Explicit instructions provided
  • Claude's acknowledgment
  • Immediate protocol violation
  • Claude's admission of failure

---
This represents a fundamental service reliability issue where paid service fails to
perform according to user specifications despite explicit instructions and
acknowledgment.

Claude Model

Sonnet

Relevant Conversation

Impact

Critical - Data loss or corrupted project

Claude Code Version

1.0.107 (Claude Code)

Platform

Anthropic API

Additional Context

_No response_

View original on GitHub ↗

This issue has 3 comments on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗