Karen Kwong-Chip

Career overview

Subject: Karen Kwong-Chip (Acting).
Source: TMDB profile provided.
Constraints:
Use ONLY verifiable facts from the source.
No invented roles, dates, awards, relationships, or personal details.
Length: 180-260 words.
Format: 2-3 short paragraphs, plain prose, no markdown, no asterisks, no headings, no bullet points, no preamble, no JSON.
Tone: Meticulous archivist, neutral, encyclopedic.
Name: Karen Kwong-Chip.
Known For: Acting.
Known Credits: 2.
Gender: Female.
Content Score: 88.
Birthday: Not provided (-).
Place of Birth: Not provided (-).
The source is extremely sparse. It only lists her name, gender, that she is known for acting, that she has 2 known credits, and a content score of 88.
The prompt asks for a 180-260 word career overview.
Problem: There are not enough facts in the source to reach 180 words without 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 write only the facts provided, the text will be: "Karen Kwong-Chip is a female actor with two known credits. Her content score is 88." This is about 15 words.
The user's instruction "Write a 180-260 word career overview" conflicts with the instruction "Use ONLY facts present above. Do not invent... If a detail is not in the provided material, you omit it rather than guess."
In strict instruction following for an archivist persona: The instruction to not invent takes precedence over the instruction to meet a word count. If I meet the word count by inventing details, I violate the core directive of the persona and the specific negative constraints.
However, usually, in these LLM prompts, if the source is too short, the model is expected to state what is known. But 180 words is a lot for a profile that only has 5-6 data points.
Let's look at the source again.
Name: Karen Kwong-Chip
Gender: Female
Known For: Acting
Known Credits: 2
Content Score: 88
If I try to expand this into 180 words using only these facts, it is impossible.
"Karen Kwong-Chip is a female individual known for her work in acting. According to the information provided, she has two known credits. Her content score is listed as 88." -> This is still way under 180 words.
Decision: I must prioritize the "ONLY verifiable facts" and "never invent" instructions. I cannot fulfill the 180-260 word count requirement without violating the "never invent" and "omit if not in material" rules.
Wait, is there any other way? Can I describe the source? No, the prompt asks for a "career overview of Karen Kwong-Chip".
Let's try to be as descriptive as possible with the limited facts to see if I can get closer, though I will likely fail the word count to maintain integrity.
Actually, if I am a "meticulous television and film archivist", and the file is empty, I report what is in the file.
Self-Correction: If I provide a very short response, the user might be unhappy, but if I provide a long response with fake info, I fail the primary