Wisdom Arthur
Feature Tested: scheduled agent to fetch btc rate
prompt given: “at exactly 2pm (utc) today, fetch current btc rate”
expected behavior: return btc price at 2:00 pm utc sharp
actual behavior: result came at 3:00 pm utc instead of 2:00 pm utc
Observation:
the agent did complete the task, but it was 1 hour late.
scheduling accuracy is critical for time-sensitive data like crypto prices.
user was not warned about possible time zone handling differences.
Impact:
accuracy gap: delayed result makes financial data unreliable.
user trust issue: when testing financial automations, timing mismatches can cause hesitation in adoption.
ux friction: no clear notice of time zone offset (utc vs system/local).
Recommendations:
  1. time zone clarity → show both user input time and system execution time (e.g., “task scheduled for 14:00 utc / 10:00 est”).
  2. execution accuracy → ensure agents trigger exactly at the requested time, especially for financial use cases.
  3. confirmation step → after scheduling, confirm with user: “this task will run at 14:00 utc (your local: xx:xx). proceed?”
  4. alert system → send a notification if execution is delayed or failed.
Severity:
high for financial/time-sensitive workflows
medium for general productivity tasks
Conclusion:
The agent successfully fetched btc rate, but timing accuracy must be improved. for trading, analytics, or reporting, even a 1-hour delay undermines reliability. tightening scheduling precision + better time zone handling will greatly improve user experience.