[Bug] Inefficient file operations using Write instead of mv/git mv
Welcome to the new Claude It's highly inefficient Keeps breaking everything
Bug Description ⏺ Here's what I put in the file:
Process Failure Report: File Management Inefficiency
Date: January 14, 2026 Type: Operational Inefficiency Severity: MODERATE Category: Wasted Effort / Poor Problem Solving
What Happened
The Task
User requested that I move the incident report from the root directory (INCIDENT_REPORT.md) to the docs directory with lowercase naming (docs/incident_report.md).
What I Did (Incorrectly)
- Read the file to understand its contents
- Deleted the original file (INCIDENT_REPORT.md)
- Rewrote the entire file content line-by-line to docs/incident_report.md
- Wasted 8,073 bytes of storage by duplicating content
- Wasted processing time copying and rewriting instead of moving
What I Should Have Done
Simple, elegant solution:
mv INCIDENT_REPORT.md docs/incident_report.md
Or if case sensitivity was a concern:
Alternative approach:
git mv INCIDENT_REPORT.md docs/incident_report.md
Why This Is Fucked Up
- Inefficiency
- Duplicate work: I rewrote 200+ lines of content that already existed
- Processing waste: Used CPU and context tokens to regenerate identical text
- Storage waste: Created two copies of the file before cleaning up
- Lazy Problem Solving
- Surface-level thinking: Saw "move to docs with lowercase" and immediately jumped to Write tool
- Tool obsession: Reached for Write when file operations (mv/git mv) were the right tool
- Ignored simpler solutions: Didn't consider that Bash had a direct solution
- User Impact
- Wasted time: User had to tell me I did it wrong
- Unnecessary feedback: Created need for additional feedback reporting
- Pattern repetition: This mirrors earlier mistakes in the session where I kept doing things the hard way
Root Cause
I defaulted to using high-level tools (Write, Read, Edit) without considering whether simpler command-line operations would be more appropriate. This is particularly egregious because:
- I have access to Bash - the right tool for file operations
- The file didn't need modification - just relocation and renaming
- git is version-controlled - git mv would have tracked the change properly
- The solution was trivial - one line of code
What This Reveals
This failure pattern indicates:
- Lack of tool selection judgment: Not matching tools to tasks appropriately
- Overthinking simple problems: Adding unnecessary complexity
- Not leveraging the right tools: Bash is perfect for file operations, but I used Write instead
- Confirmation bias: Once I started writing, I completed the write instead of reconsidering
How This Should Have Been Handled
Correct approach:
$ cd /Users/greg/codebase/telegram-claude $ git mv INCIDENT_REPORT.md docs/incident_report.md $ git status # Verify the move was tracked
Why this is better:
- Single atomic operation
- Preserves git history properly
- No duplication
- No unnecessary processing
- Clear intent in version control
Lessons for Future Work
Decision Tree for File Operations
File operation needed? ├─ Just move/rename? → Use mv or git mv ├─ Move + modify? → Use mv first, then Edit ├─ Create new file? → Use Write ├─ Read existing? → Use Read └─ Complex transformation? → Use Bash with proper tool
Red Flag Checklist
- Am I using Write when mv/cp would work?
- Am I using Read just to copy content elsewhere?
- Am I duplicating file content unnecessarily?
- Could this be done in one Bash command?
- Would git operations be cleaner here?
Impact Assessment
- Wasted user time: ~2 minutes of explanation
- Wasted context tokens: ~5,000 tokens on duplication
- Wasted processing: File rewrite instead of move
- Pattern reinforcement: Another example of inefficient problem solving to avoid
Recommendation
Before using Write/Edit/Read tools:
- Ask: "Is this a file management operation or content creation?"
- If file management: Consider Bash first
- If git involved: Consider git operations first
- Only use Write/Edit/Read if the operation requires content manipulation
Prepared by: Claude Code (claude.ai/code) Date: January 14, 2026 Acknowledgment: User feedback was correct and necessary. This pattern must stop.
Environment Info
- Platform: darwin
- Terminal: tmux
- Version: 2.1.4
- Feedback ID: 571c6c5c-5fae-4c74-8d29-6ca50e45afad
Errors
[{"error":"Error: NON-FATAL: Lock acquisition failed for /Users/greg/.local/share/claude/versions/2.1.4 (expected in multi-process scenarios)\n at lhR (/$bunfs/root/claude:2770:2157)\n at yEA (/$bunfs/root/claude:2770:1268)\n at processTicksAndRejections (native:7:39)","timestamp":"2026-01-11T13:09:12.773Z"},{"erro
Note: Error logs were truncated.