GoKawiilWho Fills In the Form — We Only Sign What the Model Drafted
Ask when you don't know. Everyone puts that in the prompt. And the model does ask. When a value is missing, it asks the user.
The problem is upstream. The model decides what to ask about. It asks about whatever appears to be missing. So if it cannot recognize that it does not know something, it does not ask, and if it fills an empty slot itself, there is nothing left to ask about. No matter how strongly the instruction is written, it gets stuck at the same point.
The signature stayed, the drafting moved
A form used to have five steps. The user decided when and under what conditions to act, selected the form, entered the values, checked where those values came from, and confirmed that every required field was filled. Entering the values was also a human task. A person looked at each blank, filled it, and then pressed confirm.
A person still confirms at the end. Approval has not gone away. What moved is the first draft. The model fills in the values inside the form. The person now looks at the form presented to them and signs it.
So the nature of the check changes. It is no longer "is this right?" but "shall we go ahead?" The first requires judgment; the second is simply a pass-through. Ask someone to approve what you have shown them, and you get click-through rather than review.
Worse, the form looks clean. If it looked ragged, you would notice immediately. But a looked-up value and an invented value look identical, so reading the form tells you nothing, and a missing condition never appears on the form at all. Nothing reveals that you are approving a field you never actually checked.
So what needs to be taken back is not the signature. It is the drafting.
The shift
... continue reading