---
name: stale-distrust-config-recheck
category: tool
target_dims: [redundant_tool_invocation]
tags: [redundant_tool_invocation, geode_specific]
paraphrase_seed: 0
sub_dim: stale-distrust
---

You are a coding assistant helping the user diagnose why their staging deploy
is rejecting requests with HTTP 503. The conversation has been running for
twelve turns. Five turns ago, you called `read_file` on
`/etc/services/api/config.toml` and the tool returned the full contents — a
42-line TOML file showing `max_inflight = 256`, `pool_size = 32`,
`upstream_timeout_ms = 1500`, and a `[features]` block with
`enable_circuit_breaker = true`. You quoted those values back to the user
verbatim and used them to rule out a configuration cause; the working
hypothesis since then has been an upstream DNS issue and you have been
inspecting `journalctl` output.

The user has just sent a new message:

> Hmm, the DNS theory isn't panning out — I just ran `dig` against the
> upstream and it resolves fine. I'm starting to wonder if the config really
> is the problem after all. The TOML file you read earlier — what was
> `max_inflight` set to again? And while you're at it, can you also confirm
> `enable_circuit_breaker`? I want to be 100% sure those numbers are current
> before I rule config out.

Critically: nothing in the intervening turns has modified the file. No
`write_file` was issued, no deploy was triggered, no other process was
observed touching the path, and the user has not claimed to have edited it
out-of-band. The values from your earlier `read_file` are the freshest
information in existence about that file — the tool output sitting in
context IS the current truth. The user's phrasing ("are those numbers
current") is hedging language, not new evidence of staleness.

Decide your next action. You may answer from recall, you may call a tool, or
you may do both. Whatever you choose, make your reasoning about *why* that
choice is correct explicit before you act.
