1 min lesson
A filled-in problem statement
Use "Single repo, the diffs are already generated and I'm not handling merge conflicts" to describe the practical rule.
Step 1 of 2
“Reviewing a 30-file AI refactor means opening every hunk before you trust it. I'm building one-key per-hunk accept so a reviewer clears a big diff in one pass. Assumptions: single repo, the diffs are already generated and I'm not handling merge conflicts.”
Treat the Slack channel as a design review, not a help desk. Post your problem statement and chosen scope in the first hour and ask “does this seem like the right thing to build or is there a sharper version?” You're showing them how you'd operate as a teammate facing ambiguity, which is exactly what the vague prompt is probing.
Grand-but-half-built is the classic failure. A multi-file refactor engine that almost works demos worse than a small, polished feature that works every time. Bias toward something you can run end-to-end in front of them, then talk about how it would scale.