Repair a smart-home automation from current device state

Why use this

1. A household routine can stop working after a device or entity changes while its old automation still looks intact. Replacing an unavailable reference without understanding the trigger and conditions can repair one symptom while creating surprising behavior elsewhere.

2. This job could compare the intended routine with current-state evidence and prepare a bounded repair proposal. Keeping the original configuration and behavioral checks visible helps the owner review the change before anything affects the home.

Why an agent / simpler alternative

Useful judgment

Trace unavailable references, compare equivalent behavior and identify dependencies or side effects that require owner confirmation.

Simpler alternative

Use the home platform's built-in repair interface for a simple renamed entity.

Unsuitable when

The change affects locks, alarms, heating or other safety/security-sensitive systems beyond approved scope.

Proposed inputs

1. Name

   Automation snapshot

   Owner

   Authorized home owner

   Minimum scope

   Relevant trigger, conditions, actions and entity IDs

   Quality check

   Preserve the original and identify protected routines

2. Name

   Device-state inventory

   Owner

   Owner-authorized source

   Minimum scope

   Only entities relevant to the requested repair

   Quality check

   Distinguish unavailable, renamed and intentionally disabled devices

Access and setup — proposed or unknown

Proposed minimum

1. Review fictional configuration/state snapshots; no home-system connection, device actuation or dashboard write.

Compatibility unknowns

1. Current entity semantics, integration access, automation compatibility and runtime support are unknown.

External actions requiring approval

1. Home-system access, configuration changes, security-sensitive settings and live device tests require appropriate approval.

Expected deliverable and review checks

Proposed artifact

Repair diagnosis with proposed mapping, behavior comparison, backup/rollback prerequisites and owner checks.

Critical checks

1. Preserve trigger/condition meaning; avoid acting on unrelated devices; distinguish configuration validity from observed behavior.

Missing output evidence

This overlay adds no new output inspection, execution or validation; consult the referenced canonical source outcome limits.

Failure signals and proposed responses

1. Signal

   A replacement entity controls a different light

   Why it matters

   A plausible name creates an unintended action

   Proposed response

   Verify device identity with the owner before mapping.

2. Signal

   The replacement drops a condition

   Why it matters

   The routine may trigger at unwanted times

   Proposed response

   Compare the full logic and retain the condition explicitly.

Effort and cost — unknown

Setup work

1. Define intended behavior and restricted device scope.

Ongoing review

1. Owner reviews repair and any separately authorized live checks.

Unknowns

1. Integration reliability, state freshness, rollback behavior and repair effort are unknown.

First check — proposed, unexecuted

Status

proposed_unexecuted

Synthetic fixture

Invent a lighting routine with one unavailable entity and a time condition, plus two similarly named replacements; propose a diagnosis.

Acceptance checks

1. Flag identity ambiguity; preserve the condition; specify rollback; actuate nothing.

Stop conditions

1. Stop if the repair broadens access or affects unapproved safety/security devices.

Limits

1. A configuration proposal cannot establish reliable home behavior or the safety of live automation changes.