The scenario
The test failure and suite invocation are available; do not assume increasing a timeout is the solution.
Required context: a selected repository matching this scenario, relevant task evidence, and access to its instructions and checks. Use redacted or synthetic data where appropriate.
Adapt the complete prompt
Edits stay in this browser tab. Saving bookmarks the original example; export your edited version to keep it elsewhere.
Why this is a strong example
It asks for a cause and a controlled experiment instead of hiding a race behind a longer timeout.
A concrete outcome
Find why the asynchronous test passes alone but intermittently fails in the suite.
The result can be assessed against an observable task rather than prompt length or confidence.
Boundaries and a method
Inspect shared state, cleanup, clocks and awaited operations. Form competing hypotheses and choose a controlled experiment before editing.
This leaves implementation judgment while constraining the changes that would exceed the task.
Evidence that can disagree
Repeat the relevant isolated and combined cases under controlled timing; report the executed population and residual uncertainty.
These checks describe what would make acceptance justified; asking for them does not mean they ran.
A safe way to encounter uncertainty
If the repository contradicts these assumptions, required access is unavailable, or a consequential product decision is missing, explain the conflict and pause the dependent work. Preserve unrelated changes.
Consequential uncertainty stays visible rather than being converted into an invented requirement.