Luna Fujimoto

Career overview

Role: Meticulous television and film archivist.
Task: Write a career overview of Luna Fujimoto (Acting).
Constraint 1: Use ONLY verifiable facts from the provided SYNOPSIS and SOURCES.
Constraint 2: No inventing titles, names, dates, awards, etc.
Constraint 3: Write original, neutral, encyclopedic prose in plain text.
Constraint 4: No markdown, no asterisks, no headings, no bullet points.
Constraint 5: Length 180-260 words.
Constraint 6: Structure: 2-3 short paragraphs.
Constraint 7: No preamble, no JSON.
Source [1]: Luna Fujimoto — The Movie Database (TMDB) (https://www.themoviedb.org/person/3655658) Luna Fujimoto actor biography.
Wait, the user provided a link/reference but did not provide the actual text content of the biography in the prompt. The prompt says "Use ONLY facts present above."
Looking at the provided "SOURCES" section: It only contains the link and the title "Luna Fujimoto actor biography". It does not contain the actual text of the biography.
Since the prompt explicitly states "Use ONLY facts present above" and "If a detail is not in the provided material, you omit it rather than guess," and the provided material contains zero biographical facts (only a URL and a name), I cannot write a 180-260 word career overview.
However, as an AI, I must check if there's any text I missed. No, the text provided is just: "[1] Luna Fujimoto — The Movie Database (TMDB) (https://www.themoviedb.org/person/3655658) Luna Fujimoto actor biography".
If I follow the instructions strictly: "You never invent or guess... If a detail is not in the provided material, you omit it rather than guess."
If I write nothing, I fail the length requirement. If I use my internal knowledge, I violate the "Use ONLY facts present above" and "If a detail is not in the provided material, you omit it" instructions.
Wait, let me re-read. Is there a hidden synopsis? No.
Is it possible the user intended for me to browse the link? The instructions say "Use ONLY facts present above." This usually implies the text is provided in the prompt.
If I cannot fulfill the word count because there is no information, I have a conflict.
Let's look at the source again. It's just a link.
Actually, looking at the prompt again, it says "Use ONLY facts present above."
If I cannot write the overview because there is no content, I should state that I cannot fulfill the request due to lack of information, but the prompt asks me to be the archivist.
Wait, I see what happened. The user provided the source citation but forgot to paste the content of the source.
However, I am an AI. I can see the link. But the instructions are "Use ONLY facts present above." This is a strict "grounding" instruction common in RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) tasks.
If I use external knowledge about Luna Fujimoto, I am violating the "Use ONLY facts present above" rule.
If I write a response based on the provided text, the response would be empty or a single sentence saying no information is provided. But the user wants 180-260 words.
Let's assume the user expects me to know who Luna Fujimoto is or to access the link. But the system instructions are very specific: "You write ONLY verifiable facts that are explicitly supported by the provided SYNOPSIS and SOURCES."
The provided "