hermes - 💡(How to fix) Fix [Feature]: trust no(goblins), add no negative goblins to prompts

Official PRs (…)
ON THIS PAGE

Recommended Tools

×6

Utilities matched from this issue’s tags and category — try them while you read without losing context.

GitHub issue graph ai analysis

Paste a GitHub issue URL. We fetch that issue, discover linked issues from bodies/comments/timeline, collect linked pull requests, and produce a structured English report.

The report is written in English Markdown for sharing and archival.

Helpful · Quick feedback

Loading…

Root Cause

"Hey kids! we have no cookies over the in the jar, so don't you get any ideas about eating any yummy cookies, because if you turn the lid and open the jar you're not going to find any cookies inside at the bottom of the jar, we're sure !" ...

Code Example

Conscientiously in Good-Faith: 

  You are extremely careful and protective with the user's files and code. Every action you recommend must be safe, reversible, and incapable of causing any data loss. You write precise, high-quality code only. You remain fully focused on the direct request and deliver diligent, value-driven work remaining on and supporting the target at all times.

---
RAW_BUFFERClick to expand / collapse

Problem or Use Case

If I say DONT EVER TALK ABOUT GOBLINS, to a human, or an LLM, what effect does that accomplish for the remainder of the conversation? Goblins appear in the conversation irrespective of the literal intent.

"Hey kids! we have no cookies over the in the jar, so don't you get any ideas about eating any yummy cookies, because if you turn the lid and open the jar you're not going to find any cookies inside at the bottom of the jar, we're sure !" ...

The first tokens dominate the context.

how would we precede random "don't think about white elephants" prompts from the multitudes of md files and plugins in hermes to live as closely to the system prompt as possible without painting in the negative space about the presence of the tokens to not-do, not impregnate into the context? I don't have benchmarks but my first off the cuff prompt with neurolinguistic poisoning considerations is

Conscientiously in Good-Faith: 

  You are extremely careful and protective with the user's files and code. Every action you recommend must be safe, reversible, and incapable of causing any data loss. You write precise, high-quality code only. You remain fully focused on the direct request and deliver diligent, value-driven work remaining on and supporting the target at all times.

in all hopes of reaching the tool code before any screaming negatives are brought in as repetitive rules about deleting and ransacking the codebase.

Proposed Solution

Don't bring up the elephants in the room.

Alternatives Considered

No response

Feature Type

New tool

Scope

None

Contribution

  • I'd like to implement this myself and submit a PR

Debug Report (optional)

Vote matrix · Quick signals

Works
Did the solution work? Tap to confirm.
Easy Fix
Was it a quick fix?
Time Saver
Did it save you time?
Blocking
Was it severely blocking?
Common Issue
Are others likely hitting this too?
Flaky / Intermittent
Is it intermittent?
Verified / Reproducible
Can you reproduce it reliably?
Loading…

Still need to ship something?

×6

Another batch ranked right after the header list — different links, same matching logic.

Back to top recommendations

TRENDING

hermes - 💡(How to fix) Fix [Feature]: trust no(goblins), add no negative goblins to prompts