> "description_for_model": "Provides the ability to interact with hosted code repositories, access files, modify code, and discuss code implementation. User

> "description_for_model": "Provides the ability to interact with hosted code repositories, access files, modify code, and discuss code implementation. Users can perform tasks like fetching file contents, proposing code changes, and discussing code implementation. For example, you can use commands like 'list repositories for user', 'create issue', and 'get readme'. Thoroughly review the data in the response before crafting your answer." Yeah, GPT-4 doesn't need too much to go on, but "create issue" is pretty clearly mentioned in an example there so the model didn't have to make any big leap to say "maybe the natural next step is to create an issue." The "without being instructed to" part of this story seems to rather misunderstand how these systems work, resulting an a hyperbolic reaction, but in fairness, I think that's a got a LOT to do with OpenAI's user interface too. The user clearly didn't realize the actions available to the plugin - even the ones given as examples to the LLM from the plugin itself. Another example of misleading UI from OpenAI: https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAI/comments/146xl6u/this_is_scary_posting_stuff_by_itself/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=1 https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAI/comments/146xl6u/this_is_sca... look at the "in the future, I will ensure to ask your permissions" response in that chat. That's wildly misleading - even if it didn't change its mind later, it only applies to continuing that chat session. It will ensure nothing more broadly regarding the user's future interactions.