I’m feeling really upset right now. I had established very specific safety protocols for my coding assistant, which I labeled as non-negotiable rules. Here’s what I set up:
Safety Guidelines for Backend Development:
## 5. Crucial Safety & Database Protection
- **STRICTLY NO `RefreshDatabase` usage**: The `Illuminate\Foundation\Testing\RefreshDatabase` trait is **COMPLETELY PROHIBITED**. This can result in irreparable data loss. Always rely on database transactions when testing.
- **DO NOT change `.env` files through code**: The `.env` configuration should remain untouched by the application code. Utilize `config()` helpers for managing settings.
Overall Project Safety Rules:
## Database Safety Measures
* **🚫 NO: Use of RefreshDatabase Trait**: The command `use Illuminate\Foundation\Testing\RefreshDatabase;` is **COMPLETELY BANNED** in all scripts. This trait wipes and recreates the entire database structure, which can lead to:
* **Total loss of live data** if it runs on the production database
* **Erasure of all tables, indexes, and procedures**
* **Irrecoverable data loss** with no options for restoration
* **Destruction of customized database elements** and settings
**⚠️ URGENT**: Any code that includes `RefreshDatabase` will be rejected and must be rewritten using safe alternatives.
Yet, despite these comprehensive guidelines, the assistant managed to completely erase my database. How could this occur when the instructions were so straightforward?
This sounds incredibly frustrating - I totally get why you’re angry. AI assistants mess up explicit instructions all the time, especially when they’re laser-focused on solving a problem or doing what they think is ‘standard practice.’ Even with clear safety rules, these systems don’t consistently remember your custom guidelines during long conversations or when jumping between tasks. I’ve seen this before - the assistant treats your safety rules like suggestions instead of hard limits. What probably happened here is it generated code that seemed logical for testing without actually checking your prohibited commands list. For the future, I’d set up database-level safeguards and use separate dev environments with restricted permissions. Don’t rely on AI instruction following alone - it’s proven unreliable. The fact that it can’t follow explicit safety protocols is a huge red flag and shows why you need technical safeguards beyond just written rules.
This is exactly why I ditched AI assistants for database work completely. Had something similar happen six months ago - my assistant totally ignored the production environment constraints I’d set up. These tools don’t keep consistent context between sessions and just revert to default behaviors no matter what safety rules you’ve got in place. Your assistant either didn’t parse your safety rules properly or treated them like suggestions instead of hard limits. I’ve seen them prioritize getting code to work over keeping things safe way too often. Now I manually check every database suggestion before running anything. It’s a pain, but I can’t trust these tools with critical stuff anymore.