Need 1 real Make scenario bundle/payload where silent AI failure is expensive

Questions
, , ,
1

:bullseye: What is your goal?

I’m looking for 1 real Make scenario payload to test a narrow reliability layer for AI execution.

The goal is not generic extraction.
The goal is to return one of only two terminal outcomes:

  • succeeded
  • failed_safe

I’m especially interested in scenarios where malformed structured output breaks something downstream.

:thinking: What is the problem & what have you tried?

The problem is silent AI failure in automation scenarios where bad structured output causes downstream breakage or expensive manual rework.

I’m looking for one real Make scenario where this actually matters, for example:

  • invoice / AP automation
  • procurement or document workflows
  • ticket routing / compliance classification
  • any workflow where malformed output breaks downstream systems or creates costly review work

What I need:

  • one sample payload
  • one target schema
  • one short note on what breaks downstream if the output is wrong
  • polling or webhook preference

What I return:

  • terminal outcome (succeeded or failed_safe)
  • failure classification if relevant
  • public-safe receipt / trust artifact
  • initial evaluator review within 24 hours

What I’ve already tried:

  • I built a narrow evaluator surface instead of a broad generic extraction layer
  • I created a submission page for real payload testing
  • I’m now looking for one real scenario payload to pressure-test the reliability layer

:clipboard: Error messages or input/output bundles

No specific Make error message yet.

This is a request for one real scenario input/output case to test reliability under real workflow conditions.

If helpful, the payload should ideally include:

  • sample input payload
  • expected target schema
  • short note about downstream failure impact
  • polling or webhook preference
3

Hey there,

just create one your self?

Instead of using the built in function that forces the AI to give you a JSON output (that I don’t know why people keep ignoring) use the commonly used variations of “please bro, give me a valid JSON bro” in the prompt and it is bound to give you some bullshit eventually. Then your parse JSON module (that people don’t need but keep using) is bound to throw an error.

4

Thanks — I agree native structured output should be used whenever possible.

I’m not looking for cases where “the model failed to emit valid JSON.”
I’m looking for cases where a workflow still needs a deterministic boundary before downstream execution, even if the model can produce structured output.

Examples:

  • schema-valid output that still violates business constraints
  • enum/classification output that is structurally valid but operationally wrong
  • cases where the correct terminal behavior should be failed_safe instead of silently passing downstream

If you know a real Make scenario like that, I’d be interested in 1 anonymized payload + target schema + a short note on downstream risk.