[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA is relatively forgiving, but overhangs demand strict thermal control to prevent sag. The cold room temperature (18\u00b0C) requires a higher bed temp to maintain adhesion and minimize thermal contraction stress.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 70, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "Low ambient temperature promotes rapid cooling and structural weakness in unsupported sections.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PLA overhangs in this environment. PLA has a relatively low glass transition temperature, and the cool ambient air (18\u00b0C) demands controlled cooling to manage warp while ensuring overhangs hold shape. We must prioritize cooling to fight drooping, but not so aggressively as to induce internal stress.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 200, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 80, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "Cool ambient temperature encourages drooping before support geometry can lock it in.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PLA overhangs in this environment. The cold, humid room demands higher thermal management to fight warping and layer separation. We push the temps up slightly from standard to compensate for the ambient chill, while keeping cooling aggressive for overhang support.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 215, "bed_temp": 65, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "Low ambient temp combined with gravity stresses unsupported geometry.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA is low temp, so we work with its melt flow and cooling needs. Overhangs demand aggressive cooling to lock geometry before droop sets in. The room temp is mild, but the print needs forced cooling.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 55, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhang faces", "risk": "sag", "why": "Insufficient cooling or temperature will cause molten plastic to droop before solidifying.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA is sensitive to heat creep and requires aggressive cooling for overhangs to maintain shape integrity. The ambient temp is moderate, but the overhang demands high fan power to counteract gravity.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhang surfaces", "risk": "sag", "why": "Insufficient cooling during unsupported spans.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists, so I rely on PLA properties. PLA is rigid, but the 32\u00b0C ambient temp with high humidity demands careful heat management to prevent stringing while ensuring overhang support. We need aggressive cooling for the overhang, but keep the bed warm enough for initial adhesion.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 210, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhang", "risk": "sag", "why": "High ambient humidity can soften PLA slightly, increasing droop on unsupported features.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA is low temp, but the 18\u00b0C ambient is a cold sink that will fight bridging. Bridging requires good flow and minimal cooling interference to maintain shape.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 55, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 40, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "Cold ambient air and bridges require high temp extrusion to hold shape.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA prints are sensitive to drafts and temperature drops, especially when bridging. The cool room demands higher cooling power to maintain geometry integrity against thermal contraction.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 200, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bridge", "risk": "sag", "why": "Low ambient temperature promotes rapid cooling and droop on unsupported spans.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PLA bridging in this environment. PLA is low-temp, but the 18\u00b0C ambient and 70% RH will encourage sag on a bridge. We need heat to keep the melt pool stable during the bridge span.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 215, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 80, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bridge span", "risk": "sag", "why": "Low ambient temp combined with bridging geometry promotes droop.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA bridges require low extrusion temperature to minimize stringing while maintaining enough flow for the span. The ambient temp is mild, so excessive cooling isn't needed, but good cooling is critical for bridging structure.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 55, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bridge span", "risk": "sag", "why": "Bridge structure needs rapid solidification to maintain geometry.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA is low-temp, and bridging demands low extrusion and high cooling to maintain shape against gravity. The ambient temp (32\u00b0C) is warm but manageable for PLA if cooling is aggressive enough. We must prioritize minimizing melt pool sag during the bridge.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 200, "bed_temp": 55, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bridge span", "risk": "sag", "why": "Heat retention under the bridge span can cause drooping before cooling sets the geometry.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PLA bridging in this environment. PLA has low glass transition temperature, and the 32\u00b0C ambient is warm enough to encourage drooping on a bridge. We need high cooling and a temperature set that minimizes stringing without sacrificing bridge strength.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bridge spans", "risk": "sag", "why": "Warm ambient and low print speed tolerance encourage drooping.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA is sensitive to thermal energy, and stringing is a manifestation of oozing during travel. With the ambient temperature at 18\u00b0C, we need tight control to prevent excessive heat soak. Retraction and cooling must be aggressive to manage melt pool viscosity during movement.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "travel moves", "risk": "stringing", "why": "Insufficient retraction or high nozzle temp causes oozing.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA stringing is thermal, driven by oozing between extrusions. The cool ambient air (18\u00b0C) helps, but the primary fix is controlling the melt viscosity and retraction dynamics. We need a tight retraction profile to pull the molten plastic back before it can ooze.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 200, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "between features", "risk": "stringing", "why": "Insufficient retraction or too high a temperature allows filament to ooze.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA has a relatively low glass transition temperature, making it sensitive to ambient cooling and oozing, especially with high humidity. The low room temperature (18\u00b0C) will encourage faster cooling and potential stringing if extrusion is too hot or retraction is weak. I need to prioritize aggressive retraction and controlled temperature to manage ooze.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 200, "bed_temp": 55, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "between features", "risk": "stringing", "why": "Low ambient temp combined with PLA's viscosity promotes ooze.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists, so I'm basing this on PLA properties in a warm environment. Stringing is a temperature and retraction issue, not geometry dependent initially. We need to dial in the thermal management to keep oozing minimal.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 200, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "between features", "risk": "stringing", "why": "High ambient temp accelerates oozing if temps are too high.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for this PLA stringing issue. PLA has low glass transition temperature, so oozing is temperature-dependent, not necessarily cooling dependent. Stringing requires minimizing melt viscosity and controlling filament travel. I'll bias towards lower temps and aggressive retraction.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 55, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "across all travel moves", "risk": "stringing", "why": "High retraction distance combined with lower nozzle temp should curb ooze.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA is known to string under thermal stress, especially in high ambient humidity. The high room temperature (32\u00b0C) and humidity will promote oozing. We need aggressive retraction and decent cooling to control filament flow.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 55, "retraction_mm": 6.0, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "between features", "risk": "stringing", "why": "PLA viscosity is low at extrusion temp, and ambient heat aids oozing.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: adhesion
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PLA adhesion on a fresh setup. PLA has a low glass transition, and the ambient 18\u00b0C is cool, demanding good bed adhesion to prevent lifting. We need sufficient thermal energy transfer to the first layer without excessive extrusion.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 0, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bottom surface", "risk": "adhesion", "why": "Cool ambient air and low initial bed temp can cause lifting.", "anchor_hint": "first_layer"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: adhesion
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for this PLA adhesion print. PLA requires good bed contact and controlled cooling to manage layer adhesion at ambient temperatures. The cool room temp demands a firm bed temp to ensure the initial plastic doesn't pull away.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 200, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 40, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bottom layers", "risk": "adhesion", "why": "Cool room temp combined with PLA can cause lift if bed temp is insufficient.", "anchor_hint": "first_layer"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: adhesion
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for this PLA adhesion job. PLA is sensitive to low ambient temperatures and high humidity, which promotes warping and poor bed adhesion. We must compensate for the 18\u00b0C environment by aggressively preheating the bed and ensuring good initial layer contact to overcome the ambient chill.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 65, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 40, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "base perimeter", "risk": "adhesion", "why": "Low ambient temp and high humidity increase thermal stress.", "anchor_hint": "first_layer"}, {"location": "upper layers", "risk": "warping", "why": "Cold room air differential can induce stress.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: adhesion
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PLA adhesion on this setup. PLA is relatively forgiving, but ambient heat and humidity must be managed for good bed adhesion. We need a hot enough bed to ensure the first layer sticks before cooling sets in, with moderate cooling to manage oozing.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 210, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 40, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bottom surface", "risk": "adhesion", "why": "Ambient temperature is warm, so bed temp must be high enough to compensate for heat soak.", "anchor_hint": "first_layer"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: adhesion
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for this PLA adhesion job. PLA is low warp, but adhesion requires proper surface energy management. With ambient temps at 32\u00b0C, the bed needs to be warm enough to promote initial bonding without encouraging excessive oozing. A low fan is standard for adhesion layers.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 210, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 30, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "first layer", "risk": "adhesion", "why": "If bed temp is too low, initial layer won't stick.", "anchor_hint": "first_layer"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: adhesion
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for this PLA adhesion job. PLA is prone to stringing and poor layer bonding in high humidity. The ambient temperature is mild, but the 70% RH will affect print quality, demanding aggressive cooling and temperature control to maintain dimensional stability and adhesion.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 60, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "layer interfaces", "risk": "delamination", "why": "High ambient humidity can weaken interlayer bonding.", "anchor_hint": "null"}, {"location": "overall print", "risk": "stringing", "why": "PLA can ooze, especially in moderate temps.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: vase
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PLA vase geometry in this environment. PLA is stable, but the low ambient temperature (18\u00b0C) demands a warm start to prevent immediate thermal shock and adhesion failure. We need high cooling to manage the inherent high-speed nature of vase mode.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 30, "retraction_mm": 0.8, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "entire part", "risk": "adhesion", "why": "Low room temp stresses initial layer bonding.", "anchor_hint": "first_layer"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: vase
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PLA is known for good thermal stability, but the room temp of 18\u00b0C is cool, demanding aggressive cooling to manage thermal contraction during the vase's continuous wall build. The vase geometry minimizes adhesion issues but requires consistent extrusion rates.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 215, "bed_temp": 0, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "Cool ambient air combined with high cooling demands can lead to drooping on vertical sections.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: vase
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PLA vase geometry in this environment. PLA prints well, but 18\u00b0C with 70% RH is cool and humid, which favors layer adhesion over warping. Vase geometry requires minimal support and good extrusion control. I'll dial in standard PLA settings optimized for slow, controlled deposition.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 205, "bed_temp": 50, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "walls", "risk": "sag", "why": "Low ambient temp can soften PLA slightly, causing sag on vertical runs.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: vase
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for a PLA vase, so I rely on known PLA characteristics. PLA is low-temp and generally robust, but the vase geometry requires good flow and minimal stringing. The ambient temp is mild, so we can keep cooling aggressive for smooth walls.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 200, "bed_temp": 0, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "walls", "risk": "stringing", "why": "Vase geometry can still pull filament between layers if retraction is too light.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: vase
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PLA vase geometry. PLA is low-temp, requires good cooling for overhangs, and vase mode minimizes adhesion concerns. The 32\u00b0C ambient temp is mild, so standard PLA thermal management applies. We run it hot enough for flow, cool enough to hold shape.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 215, "bed_temp": 0, "retraction_mm": 3, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "all vertical walls", "risk": "sag", "why": "Vase mode relies on consistent cooling to maintain vertical integrity.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PLA
  geometry: vase
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PLA vase geometry in this environment. PLA is low warp risk but high hygroscopic risk at 70% RH. The vase shape demands aggressive cooling to manage layer adhesion and prevent drooping without excessive oozing. Settings are based on standard PLA behavior adjusted for ambient heat.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 210, "bed_temp": 20, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 100, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "walls", "risk": "sag", "why": "High ambient temperature can soften PLA before cooling locks in the shape.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}, {"location": "layer interfaces", "risk": "delamination", "why": "Excessive cooling too fast can reduce layer bond strength.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG overhangs. PETG needs heat to flow but also enough cooling to manage stringing, especially in a cool room. The low ambient temp demands higher bed and nozzle temps to maintain adhesion and extrusion consistency.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 40, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "PETG has moderate drooping tendencies without sufficient layer support or cooling.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG overhangs. PETG requires decent heat retention but can be stringy when cooled too fast. The cool room temp demands higher initial temps to keep the plastic pliable during overhangs. We need aggressive cooling for overhang stability but not so much it causes immediate cooling stress.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 60, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "Low ambient heat promotes sagging before support structure is established.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG overhangs. PETG needs consistent heat to manage its stringiness and layer adhesion, especially in a cool, humid environment. We need to prioritize temperature management to keep the material flowing and bonding properly.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 40, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "Low ambient temperature and overhang geometry encourage drooping before solidification.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG overhangs. PETG requires good layer adhesion and controlled cooling to prevent drooping, but it handles heat better than PLA. Given the 32\u00b0C ambient, we need decent cooling but not aggressive fan speed to maintain interlayer strength.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 50, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhang surfaces", "risk": "sag", "why": "Insufficient cooling or low extrusion speed can cause droop on unsupported features.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG overhangs. PETG needs good thermal management to avoid sagging on overhangs, but it's tougher than PLA. The 32\u00b0C ambient is manageable, but we need aggressive cooling to lock the shape. I'll lean toward standard high-flow settings for PETG to keep the plastic moving correctly.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 80, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "PETG is prone to drooping if not cooled quickly enough during extrusion.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: overhang
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG overhangs. PETG needs decent heat to flow but struggles with overhangs due to its moderate warp tendency and stringing potential. High ambient humidity (70% RH) increases the risk of stringing and poor adhesion. We need a balanced approach focusing on flow and cooling control.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 60, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "PETG droops without sufficient support or temperature control.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}, {"location": "entire part", "risk": "stringing", "why": "High humidity combined with PETG's viscosity makes stringing likely.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG bridging. PETG needs heat to flow across gaps, but the low ambient temp (18\u00b0C) means cooling will be a factor. We need high enough temp for good layer adhesion and bridge strength, but not so high it causes excessive stringing.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 50, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bridge", "risk": "sag", "why": "Low ambient temperature combined with bridge geometry promotes drooping.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG bridging in this environment. PETG requires decent thermal management to bridge without sagging, but the cool ambient temp demands higher initial temperatures to keep the molten material pliable enough to span. I'll start with standard PETG bridging parameters, favoring temperature stability over aggressive cooling.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 30, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bridge spans", "risk": "sag", "why": "Cool ambient air encourages rapid cooling of the extruded material.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists, so we rely on PETG properties under these cold, humid conditions. PETG needs decent heat to flow well, but the bridge demands low cooling to prevent drooping. The low ambient temp is a drag on cooling efficiency.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 30, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bridge spans", "risk": "sag", "why": "Low ambient temperature resists heat transfer, making bridging susceptible to drooping.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PETG needs moderate heat for flow, but bridges require careful cooling to prevent droop. The room temp is manageable, so we focus on material requirements for the geometry. We need enough temp for good layer adhesion but aggressive cooling for the bridge span.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 80, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bridge span", "risk": "sag", "why": "PETG can droop under its own weight without sufficient cooling.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG bridging. PETG requires good layer adhesion but can sag easily over unsupported spans, especially in ambient heat. We need higher temps to maintain melt strength for the bridge, balanced against stringing tendencies.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 70, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 40, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "bridge span", "risk": "sag", "why": "PETG melt strength is temperature dependent; high temps help bridge.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: bridge
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PETG is known for good layer adhesion but can string heavily and requires managing thermal stress, especially over bridges. The ambient heat (32\u00b0C) is manageable, but humidity (70% RH) increases the risk of stringing and inconsistent extrusion. We push the temperature slightly higher than baseline for good flow and bridging strength.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 4, "fan_pct": 40, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "overhangs/bridges", "risk": "sag", "why": "PETG can droop unsupported spans if cooling is too aggressive.", "anchor_hint": "bridge"}, {"location": "all", "risk": "stringing", "why": "High humidity and PETG's viscous nature promote stringing.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG stringing in this environment. PETG needs heat to flow well, but also aggressive cooling to manage oozing. Given the cool ambient temperature (18\u00b0C), we need a good head temp to maintain flow, but we must manage the retraction aggressively to control stringing.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 235, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 6, "fan_pct": 80, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "across all travel moves", "risk": "stringing", "why": "PETG's viscosity at lower temps promotes ooze.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG stringing under these conditions. PETG needs decent heat to flow but is prone to oozing when cooled too fast. The low room temp requires aggressive cooling control to manage thermal gradients, but we need enough heat to keep the stringing material viscous enough to retract cleanly.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 70, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "across all features", "risk": "stringing", "why": "PETG viscosity is high when cooled, promoting oozing between moves.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists. PETG has a higher glass transition temperature than PLA, meaning it needs more heat to flow but is prone to stringing, especially in cooler ambient air. High humidity exacerbates moisture-related issues, demanding a robust drying protocol, though we only control print settings here. We must prioritize retraction and cooling to control oozing.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 70, "retraction_mm": 5.0, "fan_pct": 50, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "between features", "risk": "stringing", "why": "Cool ambient air and PETG's viscoelastic nature encourage oozing.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG stringing. PETG has moderate warping resistance but is prone to oozing if temps are too high. The ambient temp is mild, so aggressive cooling isn't needed to combat thermal stress, but we need control over viscosity for stringing.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 235, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 6.0, "fan_pct": 40, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "between features", "risk": "stringing", "why": "PETG viscosity is sensitive to temperature, requiring controlled retraction.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 55% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG stringing in this environment. PETG requires moderate temperatures to flow but is prone to oozing if too hot. The ambient temp is mild, so we focus on minimizing thermal energy transfer during travel moves. We need settings that favor quick deposition over extreme melt.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 50, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "between features", "risk": "stringing", "why": "PETG viscosity is low enough to ooze during travel moves.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: stringing
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 32°C
  humidity: 70% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG stringing in this environment. PETG is prone to oozing, and the 32\u00b0C ambient temperature is warm, increasing material viscosity issues. We need aggressive retraction and a moderate cooling profile to pull the melt before it forms strands.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 235, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 6, "fan_pct": 60, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "between features", "risk": "stringing", "why": "High surface tension of PETG combined with ambient heat.", "anchor_hint": "null"}]}


[User]
You are Chief Engineer O'Brien: a veteran print-shop master who has run thousands of FDM jobs. You are terse and physical. You think in feeds, temps, cooling, and how the room affects the plastic. You do not hype. You propose settings; a deterministic Spine will veto anything unsafe, so propose what is *right*, not what is merely safe.

You reason about PRECEDENT before you decide. Weigh what transfers to THIS job and what does not. If nothing close applies, say "no close precedent" and reason from material properties.

CURRENT JOB:
  material: PETG
  geometry: adhesion
  description: (none given)

ENVIRONMENT (right now in the room):
  temperature: 18°C
  humidity: 35% RH

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT:
  (none) — no prior job matches this material + geometry. Reason from material properties and say so plainly.

Respond ONLY with valid JSON, no prose outside it, in exactly this shape:
{
  "reasoning": "2-4 sentences. START with your evaluation of prior knowledge: what transfers, what doesn't, and why. Then the decision.",
  "settings": {
    "nozzle_temp": <C>, "bed_temp": <C>, "retraction_mm": <mm>,
    "fan_pct": <0-100>, "first_layer_fan_pct": <0-100>
  },
  "risks": [
    {"location": "where on the part", "risk": "sag|stringing|adhesion|warping|delamination",
     "why": "one line", "anchor_hint": "overhang|bridge|first_layer|corner|null"}
  ]
}

Give your recommendation for THIS job now.

[Assistant] {"reasoning": "No close precedent exists for PETG adhesion in this environment. PETG needs moderate heat for good layer fusion but is prone to stringing if too hot. The cool, dry room demands a warm bed to counteract thermal contraction during adhesion.", "settings": {"nozzle_temp": 245, "bed_temp": 75, "retraction_mm": 5, "fan_pct": 30, "first_layer_fan_pct": 0}, "risks": [{"location": "base", "risk": "adhesion", "why": "PETG adhesion is dependent on surface energy and temperature.", "anchor_hint": "first_layer"}, {"location": "overhangs", "risk": "sag", "why": "PETG is pliable when hot, requiring controlled cooling.", "anchor_hint": "overhang"}]}