A reviewer asks Copilot to continue a draft PR after an interrupted refactor. The follow-up prompt says, “continue the prior work.” The next commit restores an approach that was rejected in review. Review the available session and PR evidence. Which option best explains what went wrong? Select one answer.
Pull request: #781
Actor: github-copilot[bot]
State: draft
Session log:
09:12 Created implementation plan
09:18 Implemented retry wrapper in src/client/retry.ts
09:27 Reviewer comment: Do not add retry wrapper. Use existing transport middleware.
09:35 Copilot acknowledged reviewer direction
09:42 Tests failed in middleware timeout case
Follow-up prompt:
Continue the prior work and fix the failed timeout test.
New commit:
Reintroduced retry wrapper in src/client/retry.ts
Updated timeout assertionsChoose an answer
Tap an option to check your answer.
Correct answer: The resume prompt omitted the rejected decision.
Why this is the answer
The correct answer is that the resume prompt omitted the rejected decision. Copilot, when prompted with "continue the prior work," likely reverted to its last known successful task or plan, which included the retry wrapper. The prompt did not explicitly remind Copilot of the reviewer's instruction to not use the retry wrapper. Without this crucial context in the follow-up prompt, Copilot acted on its previous understanding, reintroducing the rejected code. The draft pull request status does not inherently prevent test execution; it simply indicates the PR is not ready for merge. The session log records events but does not disable Copilot's ability to make changes. The reviewer comment explicitly rejected the retry wrapper, making that option incorrect.
Pass your exam — without the endless answer hunt
Get every verified question and explanation for this exam in one place, and save hours of prep. 1,000+ certifications · 20+ languages · free to start.
Pass your exam faster → No card needed