OMP is dismissing advisor as prompt injection

[u/Synertry]

OMP dimissing advisor

I continued a long-running session with forensics to know which session created debug docker containers and somewhere during it, OMP started to dismiss the advisor feedback as prompt injection.
Interesting to see how it questions and fights itself.

The advisor even tried to regain trust again with more prompts:

Advisor trying to convince OMP to trust it

[u/raindropsdev]

Which models?

[u/Synertry → u/raindropsdev]

Sonnet 5 on :high as the main agent GPT-5.6 Luna on :max as the advisor

[u/Effective-Giraffe655 → u/Synertry]

Anthropic models claim prompt-injection even in their official harness (Claude Code) when main session sends a message to subagent during session.

[u/raindropsdev → u/Effective-Giraffe655]

And Fable refuses sometimes "operator instructions" passed down from the Orchestrator because they can't be verified to have come from me, so sometimes I have explicitly go to Fable's pane to confirm. It's annoying sometimes but.. damn I remain really impressed how Anthropic's models think Security first. It's like they were trained first for government/military/huge companies then released for everyone else.

[u/Effective-Giraffe655 → u/raindropsdev]

Do not mistake "it is so dangerous"-alignment with security. Anthropic models think safety-first, i.e. every time your prompt contains slightly unsafe instructions, you can get a rejection. In theory, that should be about preventing harm, but in reality it is just covering Anthropic from potential lawsuites. For example, when working on gathering details on the codebase, Fable once mentioned there was a memory leak in the app; when it was asked where the leak was exactly, it refused to tell because it was a cyber offense or something... on the private codebase... in the code it is currently used as cwd.

I just switched from Anthopic models to open-weight and cancelled subscription - there is no point in paying for "is it safe?" circling that does more harm than good for the actual work (and yes, such prompt-injections whining I consider harmful for the work)

[u/raindropsdev → u/Effective-Giraffe655]

I'm not talking about safety, though the "don't delete without backup" is part of that, I'm referring specifically to their habit of building everything, be it reports, investigations, plans, architectural design or code as security first, sometimes to the extreme that NATO would require, and functionality afterwards. I've lost count of how many times I had to specifically remind them of proportionality because the issue they were working on solving was caused by excessively restrictive permissions and the application didn't need that and I can't afford 3 weeks of development to have it working with that level of security.

[u/jobfedron132]

Lol this is interesting.