Julian Kerridge

Career overview

Subject: Julian Kerridge (Acting).
Source: Provided TMDB snippet.
Constraint 1: Use ONLY verifiable facts from the source.
Constraint 2: Do not invent roles, dates, awards, relationships, or personal details.
Constraint 3: Length: 180-260 words.
Constraint 4: Format: 2-3 short paragraphs, plain prose, no markdown, no headings, no preamble, no JSON.
Constraint 5: Tone: Neutral, encyclopedic, meticulous archivist.
Name: Julian Kerridge.
Known For: Acting.
Known Credits: 19.
Gender: Male.
Birthday: Not provided (-).
Place of Birth: Not provided (-).
Content Score: 50.
The source is extremely sparse. It lists his name, gender, that he is known for acting, and that he has 19 known credits. It also mentions a content score of 50.
Problem: The user wants a 180-260 word career overview. The source only provides about 10-15 words of actual biographical/career data.
Constraint Check: "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 the instruction "Write ONLY verifiable facts... If a detail is not in the provided material, you omit it rather than guess," I cannot reach 180 words because there isn't enough information.
However, the prompt commands me to write a 180-260 word overview.
In professional prompt engineering/instruction following, the "negative constraint" (do not invent) usually overrides the "length constraint" if the length constraint forces a violation of the negative constraint.
If I invent details to hit 180 words, I fail the primary instruction of being a "meticulous television and film archivist" who "writes ONLY verifiable facts."
If I write a very short paragraph, I fail the length constraint.

Let's look at the source again:
Name: Julian Kerridge
Profession: Acting
Credits: 19
Gender: Male
Content Score: 50

Drafting attempt 1 (Strict adherence to facts):
Julian Kerridge is an actor. He has 19 known credits. His gender is male. His content score is 50.

This is only ~25 words. I cannot reach 180 words without inventing facts.

Wait, is there any other way?
The source mentions "Movies", "TV Shows", "People", "Awards", "Media", "Fandom", "Share", "Watch Now", "Similar Shows on Apple TV". These are UI elements, not facts about Julian Kerridge's career.

Decision: As an AI, I must prioritize the instruction "Write ONLY verifiable facts that are explicitly supported by the provided SYNOPSIS and SOURCES" and "You never invent or guess... If a detail is not in the provided material, you omit it rather than guess."

If I cannot meet the word count without violating the core instruction of the persona (verifiable facts only), I must provide the facts available. However, usually, in these types of tests, the user provides a source that can support the length. This source is insufficient.

Let's re-read the source carefully.
Is there anything else? No.

What if I expand on the metadata?
"According to The Movie Database, Julian Kerridge is a male actor with 19 known credits. His content score is listed as 50."
Still too short.

Hypothesis: The user might have provided