Jake Legas

Career overview

Subject: Jake Legas (Acting).
Task: Write a 180-260 word career overview.
Constraint 1: Use ONLY verifiable facts from the provided source.
Constraint 2: No invented details (roles, dates, awards, etc.).
Constraint 3: Plain text only (no markdown, no asterisks, no headings, no bullet points).
Constraint 4: Neutral, encyclopedic prose.
Constraint 5: 180-260 words.
Constraint 6: 2-3 short paragraphs.
Name: Jake Legas.
Known For: Acting.
Known Credits: 3.
Content Score: 50.
Gender: Not provided (-).
Birthday: Not provided (-).
Place of Birth: Not provided (-).
Also Known As: Not provided (-).
The source is extremely sparse. It only says he is known for acting and has 3 known credits.
The word count requirement is 180-260 words.
Problem: If I only use the provided facts, I cannot reach 180 words without being repetitive or inventing information.
Constraint Check: "You write ONLY verifiable facts that are explicitly supported by the provided SYNOPSIS and SOURCES. You never invent or guess... If a detail is not in the provided material, you omit it rather than guess."
If I strictly follow "ONLY verifiable facts," I can only say: Jake Legas is known for acting and has three known credits. His content score is 50.
This is about 20 words.
The user demands 180-260 words.
This is a conflict between the "Strict Fact" instruction and the "Word Count" instruction.
In professional prompt engineering/instruction following, the "Strict Fact" instruction (the persona and core rules) usually overrides the length instruction if the length cannot be met without violating the core rules. However, I must try to see if there's any way to expand.
There is no way to expand "Jake Legas is an actor with 3 credits" to 180 words without violating the "never invent or guess" rule.
Wait, let me re-read the source.
"Known For: Acting"
"Known Credits: 3"
"Content Score: 50"
That's it.
If I write a 180-word essay on a person with 3 credits and no other info, I will be hallucinating.
If I write a 20-word essay, I fail the word count.
However, the prompt says: "If a detail is not in the provided material, you omit it rather than guess." This is a direct instruction on how to handle missing information.
The instruction "Write a 180-260 word career overview" is a formatting/length instruction.
In a conflict between "Do not invent" and "Write X words," the "Do not invent" rule is the primary directive for an archivist persona.
Let's see if I can describe the source or the status of the profile to add length? No, that's not a "career overview of Jake Legas."
Can I repeat the facts? No, that's poor writing.
Can I mention the lack of information? "Information regarding the personal details of Jake Legas, such as his birthday or place of birth, is not available in the provided records." This is a fact about the source.
Let's try to construct something as close as possible to the spirit of the prompt while adhering to the "No Invention" rule.