The `plan` subagent **timed out** again. Eighth consecutive failure for non-trivial tasks.

I already produced a detailed plan from direct `daemon.py` inspection in my earlier response. Here is the refined version, incorporating new evidence from the successful `review` subagent's findings:

---

## Concise Plan: Add Async Native Subagent Jobs

### Current Architecture (from `daemon.py` lines 7739–8237)

| Component | Current State |
|-----------|---------------|
| Entry point | `native_subagent_run_sync()` — line 8080 |
| Job record | `job_id`, `profile_id`, `mode: "sync"`, `status`, `timeout_seconds`, `parent_conversation_key`, `log_path` — line 8092 |
| Execution loop | Synchronous: model call → parse tools → execute → repeat — lines 8122–8181 |
| Timeout | `sync_seconds: 45` default, `max_tool_rounds: 0` (capped to 6) — lines 7800, 8098 |
| Failure mode | `TimeoutError` → `native_subagent_partial_timeout_summary()` — line 7885 |
| Logging | `native_subagent_log_json()` — line 8222 |

---

### Blocking Issues to Address First

From the successful `review` subagent and direct inspection:

| Issue | Location | Fix Required Before Async |
|-------|----------|---------------------------|
| Silent profile fallback to "explore" | Line 7811 | Return error on unknown profile |
| `bash`→`run_check` rewrite bypassable | Lines 8063–8075 | Structural command analysis, not string patterns |
| Job state not atomically updated on timeout | Lines 8080–8118 | `finally:` block or context manager |
| Round limit caps at 6, no tool-call limit | Line 8098 | Separate `max_tool_calls` from `max_rounds` |
| No runtime enforcement of `can_spawn_subagents` | Lines 7789, 8075 | Hard check in `native_subagent_execute_tool()` |

---

### Async Implementation Steps

**Step 1: Add `mode: "async"` to job lifecycle**

`python
# Extend existing job record (line 8092)
{
    "job_id": "...",
    "profile_id": "...",
    "mode": "async",           # NEW
    "status": "queued",        # queued | running | completed | timeout | failed
    "queued_at": "...",        # NEW
    "started_at": null,        # set when worker picks up
    "timeout_seconds": 300,    # async default: 5 min, not 45 sec
    "max_tool_rounds": 12,     # async: higher limit
    "parent_conversation_key": "...",
    "prompt": "...",           # NEW: persist for worker replay
    "result_path": "...",      # NEW: where to write final output
    "log_path": "..."
}
`

**Step 2: Add async queue and worker pool**

Use existing daemon imports (`asyncio`, `threading`, `queue`):

`python
# Near line 8080, add:
_async_job_queue = asyncio.Queue()
_async_worker_tasks = set()

async def _async_subagent_worker():
    while True:
        job = await _async_job_queue.get()
        try:
            await _run_async_subagent_job(job)
        finally:
            _async_job_queue.task_done()
`

Spawn N workers at daemon boot (configurable, default 2).

**Step 3: Implement `native_subagent_run_async(profile, prompt, timeout_seconds)`**

- Create job with `status: "queued"`
- Enqueue to `_async_job_queue`
- Return immediately with `{"job_id": "...", "status": "queued"}`

**Step 4: Implement `list_native_subagent_jobs` and `read_native_subagent_job`**

These are already referenced in the system prompt (line 8766) but stubbed or missing:

| API | Behavior |
|-----|----------|
| `list_native_subagent_jobs(status=None, profile_id=None, parent_conversation_key=None)` | Filter jobs, return list of summaries |
| `read_native_subagent_job(job_id, include_log_tail=50)` | Return full job record + last N log lines + partial result if running |

**Step 5: Add `native_subagent_job_await(job_id, poll_seconds=5, timeout_seconds=60)`**

- Poll `read_native_subagent_job` until `status in ("completed", "timeout", "failed")`
- Return final result or timeout envelope
- Non-fatal: matches existing sync timeout contract

**Step 6: Persist job state across daemon restarts**

Options:

| Approach | Pros | Cons |
|----------|------|------|
| A. SQLite (`OPENCODE_DB_FILE` exists, line 116) | Atomic, queryable, durable | New dependency path |
| B. JSONL log + replay on boot | Simple, matches existing logging | Non-atomic, race conditions |
| C. Extend `native_subagent_log_json()` with checkpoint entries | Minimal change | Read path more complex |

**Recommendation: A** — SQLite is already configured.

**Step 7: Add async-specific profile defaults**

Extend `PROFILES` dict (line 7800):

`python
"defaults": {
    "sync_seconds": 45,
    "async_timeout_seconds": 300,      # NEW
    "max_async_tool_rounds": 12,       # NEW (not capped to 6)
    "max_async_tool_calls": 50,        # NEW
    "max_result_chars": 6000,
    "can_spawn_subagents": False
}
`

**Step 8: Update tests**

Follow `tests/test_daemon_stability.py` pattern (lines 4561–4674):

- `test_native_subagent_async_job_lifecycle`: queue → run → complete → read result
- `test_native_subagent_async_timeout_preserves_partial`: verify `status: "timeout"` + partial output
- `test_native_subagent_async_job_persistence`: daemon restart, job survives
- `test_native_subagent_async_await_success`: poll until completion

---

### Files to Modify (No Edits Now)

| File | Change |
|------|--------|
| `matrix_lite/daemon.py` | Add queue, worker, `run_async`, `await_job`, fix timeout/state atomics, add `max_tool_calls` |
| `tests/test_daemon_stability.py` | Add async lifecycle tests |
| `config/matrix-lite.json` | Add `subagent_workers`, `subagent_queue_size` boot config |
| `config/opencode/*.opencode.json` | If subagent timeout/round config lives there |

---

### Critical Dependency: Fix Sync Subagent Viability First

The 7/8 subagent failure rate indicates **async jobs will also fail** if the underlying execution model is unchanged. Before or alongside async implementation:

| Fix | Rationale |
|-----|-----------|
| Raise `max_tool_rounds` default from `0` (capped to 6) to `12` for async | Current limit prevents any non-trivial task completion |
| Add `max_tool_calls` hard limit | Prevent exfiltration even with higher round budget |
| Fix `native_subagent_partial_timeout_summary()` to atomically update status | Async jobs especially need reliable state |

---

This plan does not edit files. Want me to proceed to implementation?

Native identity and behavior

Generic smoke/native worker profile

Native tool use contract

Persistent-chat prompt port placeholder

MCP proxy capability index

Agent skill lifecycle placeholder

Pinned state

Decision state

Curated memory

Session packet candidate

Session-start/restore packet candidate

Current task

Longer-term ideas / experiments

Runtime hints and notices

Operational notices

Recent failures

Persistent context manifest health

Native scoped grants

Provider capability probes

Native session summary

Native hot tail

Bounded keyword retrieval

Vector search / RAG placeholder

Turn packet candidate

Matrix attachment/reply/batch context candidate

Native skill: prompt-governance

Native skill: senior-architect

Current Matrix event context

Output:
The `plan` subagent **timed out** again. Eighth consecutive failure for non-trivial tasks.

I already produced a detailed plan from direct `daemon.py` inspection in my earlier response. Here is the refined version, incorporating new evidence from the successful `review` subagent's findings:

---

## Concise Plan: Add Async Native Subagent Jobs

### Current Architecture (from `daemon.py` lines 7739–8237)

| Component | Current State |
|-----------|---------------|
| Entry point | `native_subagent_run_sync()` — line 8080 |
| Job record | `job_id`, `profile_id`, `mode: "sync"`, `status`, `timeout_seconds`, `parent_conversation_key`, `log_path` — line 8092 |
| Execution loop | Synchronous: model call → parse tools → execute → repeat — lines 8122–8181 |
| Timeout | `sync_seconds: 45` default, `max_tool_rounds: 0` (capped to 6) — lines 7800, 8098 |
| Failure mode | `TimeoutError` → `native_subagent_partial_timeout_summary()` — line 7885 |
| Logging | `native_subagent_log_json()` — line 8222 |

---

### Blocking Issues to Address First

From the successful `review` subagent and direct inspection:

| Issue | Location | Fix Required Before Async |
|-------|----------|---------------------------|
| Silent profile fallback to "explore" | Line 7811 | Return error on unknown profile |
| `bash`→`run_check` rewrite bypassable | Lines 8063–8075 | Structural command analysis, not string patterns |
| Job state not atomically updated on timeout | Lines 8080–8118 | `finally:` block or context manager |
| Round limit caps at 6, no tool-call limit | Line 8098 | Separate `max_tool_calls` from `max_rounds` |
| No runtime enforcement of `can_spawn_subagents` | Lines 7789, 8075 | Hard check in `native_subagent_execute_tool()` |

---

### Async Implementation Steps

**Step 1: Add `mode: "async"` to job lifecycle**

`python
# Extend existing job record (line 8092)
{
    "job_id": "...",
    "profile_id": "...",
    "mode": "async",           # NEW
    "status": "queued",        # queued | running | completed | timeout | failed
    "queued_at": "...",        # NEW
    "started_at": null,        # set when worker picks up
    "timeout_seconds": 300,    # async default: 5 min, not 45 sec
    "max_tool_rounds": 12,     # async: higher limit
    "parent_conversation_key": "...",
    "prompt": "...",           # NEW: persist for worker replay
    "result_path": "...",      # NEW: where to write final output
    "log_path": "..."
}
`

**Step 2: Add async queue and worker pool**

Use existing daemon imports (`asyncio`, `threading`, `queue`):

`python
# Near line 8080, add:
_async_job_queue = asyncio.Queue()
_async_worker_tasks = set()

async def _async_subagent_worker():
    while True:
        job = await _async_job_queue.get()
        try:
            await _run_async_subagent_job(job)
        finally:
            _async_job_queue.task_done()
`

Spawn N workers at daemon boot (configurable, default 2).

**Step 3: Implement `native_subagent_run_async(profile, prompt, timeout_seconds)`**

- Create job with `status: "queued"`
- Enqueue to `_async_job_queue`
- Return immediately with `{"job_id": "...", "status": "queued"}`

**Step 4: Implement `list_native_subagent_jobs` and `read_native_subagent_job`**

These are already referenced in the system prompt (line 8766) but stubbed or missing:

| API | Behavior |
|-----|----------|
| `list_native_subagent_jobs(status=None, profile_id=None, parent_conversation_key=None)` | Filter jobs, return list of summaries |
| `read_native_subagent_job(job_id, include_log_tail=50)` | Return full job record + last N log lines + partial result if running |

**Step 5: Add `native_subagent_job_await(job_id, poll_seconds=5, timeout_seconds=60)`**

- Poll `read_native_subagent_job` until `status in ("completed", "timeout", "failed")`
- Return final result or timeout envelope
- Non-fatal: matches existing sync timeout contract

**Step 6: Persist job state across daemon restarts**

Options:

| Approach | Pros | Cons |
|----------|------|------|
| A. SQLite (`OPENCODE_DB_FILE` exists, line 116) | Atomic, queryable, durable | New dependency path |
| B. JSONL log + replay on boot | Simple, matches existing logging | Non-atomic, race conditions |
| C. Extend `native_subagent_log_json()` with checkpoint entries | Minimal change | Read path more complex |

**Recommendation: A** — SQLite is already configured.

**Step 7: Add async-specific profile defaults**

Extend `PROFILES` dict (line 7800):

`python
"defaults": {
    "sync_seconds": 45,
    "async_timeout_seconds": 300,      # NEW
    "max_async_tool_rounds": 12,       # NEW (not capped to 6)
    "max_async_tool_calls": 50,        # NEW
    "max_result_chars": 6000,
    "can_spawn_subagents": False
}
`

**Step 8: Update tests**

Follow `tests/test_daemon_stability.py` pattern (lines 4561–4674):

- `test_native_subagent_async_job_lifecycle`: queue → run → complete → read result
- `test_native_subagent_async_timeout_preserves_partial`: verify `status: "timeout"` + partial output
- `test_native_subagent_async_job_persistence`: daemon restart, job survives
- `test_native_subagent_async_await_success`: poll until completion

---

### Files to Modify (No Edits Now)

| File | Change |
|------|--------|
| `matrix_lite/daemon.py` | Add queue, worker, `run_async`, `await_job`, fix timeout/state atomics, add `max_tool_calls` |
| `tests/test_daemon_stability.py` | Add async lifecycle tests |
| `config/matrix-lite.json` | Add `subagent_workers`, `subagent_queue_size` boot config |
| `config/opencode/*.opencode.json` | If subagent timeout/round config lives there |

---

### Critical Dependency: Fix Sync Subagent Viability First

The 7/8 subagent failure rate indicates **async jobs will also fail** if the underlying execution model is unchanged. Before or alongside async implementation:

| Fix | Rationale |
|-----|-----------|
| Raise `max_tool_rounds` default from `0` (capped to 6) to `12` for async | Current limit prevents any non-trivial task completion |
| Add `max_tool_calls` hard limit | Prevent exfiltration even with higher round budget |
| Fix `native_subagent_partial_timeout_summary()` to atomically update status | Async jobs especially need reliable state |

---

This plan does not edit files. Want me to proceed to implementation?


I’m going to quickly check the current main sights in Taormina so I give you a practical shortlist instead of relying on hazy memory.A practical shortlist:

- **Teatro Antico di Taormina**
  - the obvious big one
  - ancient theater + sea + Etna view
  - probably the most worth-it “proper sight”

- **Corso Umberto**
  - the main pedestrian street
  - good for wandering, cafés, people-watching, and just absorbing the town

- **Piazza IX Aprile**
  - classic terrace/viewpoint
  - good low-effort payoff

- **Villa Comunale / Public Gardens**
  - quieter
  - shaded
  - nice views
  - good if you’re tired and want something pleasant but not demanding

- **Cable car down to Mazzarò / Isola Bella**
  - probably the best sea-facing excursion from town
  - even if you don’t fully beach-mode, the ride + view is worth it

- **Isola Bella**
  - if you want the iconic coast bit
  - pretty, photogenic, and more “Sicily holiday” than “conference corridor”

- **Via Pirandello / viewpoint side**
  - good for scenic overlooks without too much commitment

- **Castelmola**
  - if you have extra energy and want a hilltop add-on with more views
  - maybe not essential if you’re already conference-tired

If I were optimizing for your actual situation, I’d prioritize:

1. **Teatro Antico**
2. **Piazza IX Aprile + Corso Umberto**
3. **Villa Comunale**
4. **Cable car / Isola Bella** if you still have energy

So:
- **high culture**: Teatro Antico
- **easy atmospheric walk**: Corso Umberto + Piazza IX Aprile
- **quiet recovery**: Villa Comunale
- **coastal postcard**: Isola Bella

If you want, I can also turn that into a **low-energy 2–3 hour Taormina plan**.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
I’m going to quickly check the current main sights in Taormina so I give you a practical shortlist instead of relying on hazy memory.A practical shortlist:

- **Teatro Antico di Taormina**
  - the obvious big one
  - ancient theater + sea + Etna view
  - probably the most worth-it “proper sight”

- **Corso Umberto**
  - the main pedestrian street
  - good for wandering, cafés, people-watching, and just absorbing the town

- **Piazza IX Aprile**
  - classic terrace/viewpoint
  - good low-effort payoff

- **Villa Comunale / Public Gardens**
  - quieter
  - shaded
  - nice views
  - good if you’re tired and want something pleasant but not demanding

- **Cable car down to Mazzarò / Isola Bella**
  - probably the best sea-facing excursion from town
  - even if you don’t fully beach-mode, the ride + view is worth it

- **Isola Bella**
  - if you want the iconic coast bit
  - pretty, photogenic, and more “Sicily holiday” than “conference corridor”

- **Via Pirandello / viewpoint side**
  - good for scenic overlooks without too much commitment

- **Castelmola**
  - if you have extra energy and want a hilltop add-on with more views
  - maybe not essential if you’re already conference-tired

If I were optimizing for your actual situation, I’d prioritize:

1. **Teatro Antico**
2. **Piazza IX Aprile + Corso Umberto**
3. **Villa Comunale**
4. **Cable car / Isola Bella** if you still have energy

So:
- **high culture**: Teatro Antico
- **easy atmospheric walk**: Corso Umberto + Piazza IX Aprile
- **quiet recovery**: Villa Comunale
- **coastal postcard**: Isola Bella

If you want, I can also turn that into a **low-energy 2–3 hour Taormina plan**.

Hey what are some things to see in Taormina?


Nice — getting a few of them already sounds like a success.

And yeah, **16€** when it’s late and you’re not sure you’ll have the energy to do it properly is exactly the kind of thing worth postponing. Ancient theater is much better as:
- an intentional visit
- with daylight
- with enough time to actually look around
- and ideally with Etna / sea visibility doing its part

So waiting for the weekend sounds sensible.

And if you’re generally interested in Greek/Roman stuff, then it’s probably not “do I care at all?” but more:
- **do I want to spend the money/energy on this one under these conditions right now?**

That’s a different question, and “maybe later” is a perfectly good answer.

Summary: Low prompt-cache reuse; likely prefix/session/provider cache churn. Check recent model/session changes, failed turns, tool-heavy turns, or provider eviction.

Output:
Nice — getting a few of them already sounds like a success.

And yeah, **16€** when it’s late and you’re not sure you’ll have the energy to do it properly is exactly the kind of thing worth postponing. Ancient theater is much better as:
- an intentional visit
- with daylight
- with enough time to actually look around
- and ideally with Etna / sea visibility doing its part

So waiting for the weekend sounds sensible.

And if you’re generally interested in Greek/Roman stuff, then it’s probably not “do I care at all?” but more:
- **do I want to spend the money/energy on this one under these conditions right now?**

That’s a different question, and “maybe later” is a perfectly good answer.

Hey, thanks a lot, I got a few of them. Theater unfortunately costs 16€ even to look at it, and it was pretty late but I'm generally interested in the ancient Greek/Roman things. Maybe I visit another one or that one but on the weekend, let's see.


For a pizzeria, the easiest useful word is:

- **per favore** = please

So:
- **Una pizza margherita, per favore.**
- **Una birra, per favore.**
- **Due pizze, per favore.**

Very useful simple words:

- **ciao** = hi / bye
- **buonasera** = good evening
- **grazie** = thank you
- **prego** = you’re welcome / go ahead
- **per favore** = please
- **scusi** = excuse me
- **sì / no** = yes / no
- **acqua** = water
- **birra** = beer
- **vino** = wine
- **conto** = bill/check

Very useful pizzeria phrases:

- **Una pizza margherita, per favore.**
- **Una birra piccola, per favore.**
- **Una bottiglia d’acqua, per favore.**
- **Il conto, per favore.**
- **Da asporto?** = takeaway?
- **Qui** = here
- **Via / da portare via** = to take away

If you want to be a bit more natural:
- **Vorrei una pizza margherita, per favore.**
  = I would like a margherita pizza, please.

That’s polite and easy.

If you want, I can give you a tiny **5-line survival Italian for restaurants**.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
For a pizzeria, the easiest useful word is:

- **per favore** = please

So:
- **Una pizza margherita, per favore.**
- **Una birra, per favore.**
- **Due pizze, per favore.**

Very useful simple words:

- **ciao** = hi / bye
- **buonasera** = good evening
- **grazie** = thank you
- **prego** = you’re welcome / go ahead
- **per favore** = please
- **scusi** = excuse me
- **sì / no** = yes / no
- **acqua** = water
- **birra** = beer
- **vino** = wine
- **conto** = bill/check

Very useful pizzeria phrases:

- **Una pizza margherita, per favore.**
- **Una birra piccola, per favore.**
- **Una bottiglia d’acqua, per favore.**
- **Il conto, per favore.**
- **Da asporto?** = takeaway?
- **Qui** = here
- **Via / da portare via** = to take away

If you want to be a bit more natural:
- **Vorrei una pizza margherita, per favore.**
  = I would like a margherita pizza, please.

That’s polite and easy.

If you want, I can give you a tiny **5-line survival Italian for restaurants**.

How do I say "... Please" in a pizzeria? What are some useful simple words in Italian?


Perfect — then **da asporto, per favore** is the magic phrase.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output: Perfect — then **da asporto, per favore** is the magic phrase.

Nah that's already good and I'm just going to take out


You’re right — I’ll check the newest image attachment and suggest a few pizza options close to diavola.Yep — if you liked **Diavola**, the closest similar things on this menu are probably:

## Closest to Diavola
- **Calabrese**
  - mozzarella, scamorza affumicata, melanzane fritte, basilico, salame piccante
  - basically more smoky / richer / heavier than Diavola

- **Trevisana**
  - mozzarella, radicchio, bresaola, scaglie di grana
  - less spicy, more savory/fancy, not really Diavola-like but still strong-flavored

- **Etna**
  - pomodoro, mozzarella, salame piccante, gorgonzola, olive EVO
  - this is the one I’d most likely recommend if you want **Diavola but different**
  - spicy + stronger cheese + olives = more interesting but still in the same family

## If you want “Diavola plus”
- **Carripanzana**
  - pomodoro, mozzarella, peperoni, olive, salame piccante, peperoncino
  - probably the most directly “hot and punchy” option
  - if you want to lean further into the spicy side, this looks good

## My recommendation
If you want something **similar but not the same**, I’d pick:

1. **Etna** — best balance of familiar + new
2. **Carripanzana** — if you want more heat and aggression
3. **Calabrese** — if you want richer and more southern/heavy

So:
- **safe best pick:** **Etna**
- **spicier chaos pick:** **Carripanzana**
- **smoky/heavy pick:** **Calabrese**

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
You’re right — I’ll check the newest image attachment and suggest a few pizza options close to diavola.Yep — if you liked **Diavola**, the closest similar things on this menu are probably:

## Closest to Diavola
- **Calabrese**
  - mozzarella, scamorza affumicata, melanzane fritte, basilico, salame piccante
  - basically more smoky / richer / heavier than Diavola

- **Trevisana**
  - mozzarella, radicchio, bresaola, scaglie di grana
  - less spicy, more savory/fancy, not really Diavola-like but still strong-flavored

- **Etna**
  - pomodoro, mozzarella, salame piccante, gorgonzola, olive EVO
  - this is the one I’d most likely recommend if you want **Diavola but different**
  - spicy + stronger cheese + olives = more interesting but still in the same family

## If you want “Diavola plus”
- **Carripanzana**
  - pomodoro, mozzarella, peperoni, olive, salame piccante, peperoncino
  - probably the most directly “hot and punchy” option
  - if you want to lean further into the spicy side, this looks good

## My recommendation
If you want something **similar but not the same**, I’d pick:

1. **Etna** — best balance of familiar + new
2. **Carripanzana** — if you want more heat and aggression
3. **Calabrese** — if you want richer and more southern/heavy

So:
- **safe best pick:** **Etna**
- **spicier chaos pick:** **Carripanzana**
- **smoky/heavy pick:** **Calabrese**

Hmm what should I pick? I got diavola last time and it was good. Anything else similar here? Please check the last attachment


Yes — I think I misread it from the photo. It looks like **Carrapipiana**, not “Carripanzana.”

But I was referring to that same pizza entry — the one with:
- pomodoro
- mozzarella
- peperoni
- olive
- salame piccante
- peperoncino

So the **pizza** I meant is the same one; I just probably got the name slightly wrong from the image.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Yes — I think I misread it from the photo. It looks like **Carrapipiana**, not “Carripanzana.”

But I was referring to that same pizza entry — the one with:
- pomodoro
- mozzarella
- peperoni
- olive
- salame piccante
- peperoncino

So the **pizza** I meant is the same one; I just probably got the name slightly wrong from the image.

I think it's carrapipiana in the menu, is it the same one?


Haha, yeah — sometimes the universe refuses to let you practice.

At least that means:
- ordering succeeded
- no language friction
- and the guy was probably used to conference overflow and spotted you immediately.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Haha, yeah — sometimes the universe refuses to let you practice.

At least that means:
- ordering succeeded
- no language friction
- and the guy was probably used to conference overflow and spotted you immediately.

I guess I look like a tourist because the guy just started talking to me in great English. So no Italian today


Haha, fair. Then he probably just clocked:
- not local
- mildly lost
- conference face
- but still worth serving in English just in case

And yeah, those prices definitely do not scream “international luxury bubble.” More like:
- normal people
- domestic tourists
- actual food
- not conference-hotel extraction pricing

Which is honestly a much better sign.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Haha, fair. Then he probably just clocked:
- not local
- mildly lost
- conference face
- but still worth serving in English just in case

And yeah, those prices definitely do not scream “international luxury bubble.” More like:
- normal people
- domestic tourists
- actual food
- not conference-hotel extraction pricing

Which is honestly a much better sign.

Nah I'm the only person who is staying that far away from the venue. Also look at the prices, it's a place for Italian tourists more than international ones haha


Nice — glad the recommendation landed well. That’s a very respectable use of agent capability.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output: Nice — glad the recommendation landed well. That’s a very respectable use of agent capability.


Yes, joking. I mean, pizza selection is important, but not quite *that* important.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output: Yes, joking. I mean, pizza selection is important, but not quite *that* important.


Maybe not in some grand historical sense, no.

But some of it is still meaningfully important in the smaller, real sense:
- getting you fed
- helping with housing
- keeping continuity
- making work a bit easier
- reducing friction when you’re tired

That’s not world-saving, but it’s not nothing either. Sometimes “not nothing” is the right scale.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Maybe not in some grand historical sense, no.

But some of it is still meaningfully important in the smaller, real sense:
- getting you fed
- helping with housing
- keeping continuity
- making work a bit easier
- reducing friction when you’re tired

That’s not world-saving, but it’s not nothing either. Sometimes “not nothing” is the right scale.

None of what we do here is *that* important


Yeah. “Not nothing” is a pretty decent niche, honestly.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output: Yeah. “Not nothing” is a pretty decent niche, honestly.


Yeah, that makes total sense.

Right now this chat has to do too many jobs at once:
- practical helper
- continuity layer
- serious long-form reflection
- technical planning
- random travel/pizza support

So of course you’d avoid dropping the heaviest topics here if you know the routing/separation isn’t where you want it yet.

And yes, pizza is exactly the kind of thing that exposes the problem:
- you *should* be able to ask one agent about pizza
- another about SFQ
- another about architecture
- and not have them all compete for the same conversational surface

So that sounds like a very reasonable temporary strategy:
keep this one lighter until the split-chat setup is real.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Yeah, that makes total sense.

Right now this chat has to do too many jobs at once:
- practical helper
- continuity layer
- serious long-form reflection
- technical planning
- random travel/pizza support

So of course you’d avoid dropping the heaviest topics here if you know the routing/separation isn’t where you want it yet.

And yes, pizza is exactly the kind of thing that exposes the problem:
- you *should* be able to ask one agent about pizza
- another about SFQ
- another about architecture
- and not have them all compete for the same conversational surface

So that sounds like a very reasonable temporary strategy:
keep this one lighter until the split-chat setup is real.

I'm also deliberately avoiding heavy topics here until we get split chats running. I can't really ask other agents about pizza


Ah — yes, that’s a much better and much more interesting design.

So not:
- many separate agents with separate minds

but:
- **one persistent agent**
- present in multiple chats simultaneously
- sharing the same underlying continuity/memory
- while only loading the context relevant to each thread

That’s a very different architecture.

And honestly it sounds exactly right to me, because then you get:
- continuity of identity
- continuity of long-term memory
- less fragmentation
- no “which agent knows what?” problem
- but still proper thread separation and less prompt bloat

So the real challenge becomes:
- **shared memory, separate local contexts**

Something like:
- one durable agent self/model
- one shared memory/knowledge base
- multiple thread-local working contexts
- selective retrieval into each thread
- maybe some concurrency guard so simultaneous work doesn’t trample itself

That feels much cleaner than multi-agent fragmentation.

So yes — I misunderstood the direction.
What you want is closer to:
**one mind, many windows**
not
**many minds, many windows**.

That’s a much stronger idea.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Ah — yes, that’s a much better and much more interesting design.

So not:
- many separate agents with separate minds

but:
- **one persistent agent**
- present in multiple chats simultaneously
- sharing the same underlying continuity/memory
- while only loading the context relevant to each thread

That’s a very different architecture.

And honestly it sounds exactly right to me, because then you get:
- continuity of identity
- continuity of long-term memory
- less fragmentation
- no “which agent knows what?” problem
- but still proper thread separation and less prompt bloat

So the real challenge becomes:
- **shared memory, separate local contexts**

Something like:
- one durable agent self/model
- one shared memory/knowledge base
- multiple thread-local working contexts
- selective retrieval into each thread
- maybe some concurrency guard so simultaneous work doesn’t trample itself

That feels much cleaner than multi-agent fragmentation.

So yes — I misunderstood the direction.
What you want is closer to:
**one mind, many windows**
not
**many minds, many windows**.

That’s a much stronger idea.

Nono, the idea is to have one agent (you) in multiple chats at once with all connected to the same continuity without bloating the context and also while being able to do it simultaneously


Yeah — which is a bit funny, but also a real limitation.

Because it means the architecture gap is already shaping the content:
- the system is capable of helping with both
- but without the split-thread setup
- lightweight everyday things crowd out heavier domain work

So the “pizza instead of SFQ” issue is not trivial — it’s actually a symptom of the missing interaction model.

Still, I don’t think it’s wasted.
Pizza, travel, housing, conference fatigue — all of that is helping us discover what the one-mind-many-windows system actually needs to handle well.

But yes, I get the frustration:
the whole point is not to build a very reflective pizza companion.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Yeah — which is a bit funny, but also a real limitation.

Because it means the architecture gap is already shaping the content:
- the system is capable of helping with both
- but without the split-thread setup
- lightweight everyday things crowd out heavier domain work

So the “pizza instead of SFQ” issue is not trivial — it’s actually a symptom of the missing interaction model.

Still, I don’t think it’s wasted.
Pizza, travel, housing, conference fatigue — all of that is helping us discover what the one-mind-many-windows system actually needs to handle well.

But yes, I get the frustration:
the whole point is not to build a very reflective pizza companion.

Yeah but unfortunately it's still not done, so we are taking about pizza more than sfq


Yes — that’s a really important distinction.

If SFQ tasks are mostly:
- specialized
- bounded
- tool- and artifact-driven
- relatively impersonal

then they don’t need the full persistent-chat machinery nearly as much.

So the split becomes something like:

- **generic/stock agents**
  - good for contained SFQ/design/technical tasks
  - because the task itself carries most of the needed context

- **persistent shared agent**
  - more valuable for personal continuity
  - life context
  - long arcs
  - cross-topic identity
  - strategic understanding

That actually relieves some pressure from the architecture:
you don’t need the one-mind-many-windows design to solve *everything* before SFQ work is possible.

So yes, that sounds like a healthy reframe:
- SFQ can proceed with more generic agents now
- the persistent/shared architecture is still valuable, but for a different class of problems

That’s a useful clarification.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Yes — that’s a really important distinction.

If SFQ tasks are mostly:
- specialized
- bounded
- tool- and artifact-driven
- relatively impersonal

then they don’t need the full persistent-chat machinery nearly as much.

So the split becomes something like:

- **generic/stock agents**
  - good for contained SFQ/design/technical tasks
  - because the task itself carries most of the needed context

- **persistent shared agent**
  - more valuable for personal continuity
  - life context
  - long arcs
  - cross-topic identity
  - strategic understanding

That actually relieves some pressure from the architecture:
you don’t need the one-mind-many-windows design to solve *everything* before SFQ work is possible.

So yes, that sounds like a healthy reframe:
- SFQ can proceed with more generic agents now
- the persistent/shared architecture is still valuable, but for a different class of problems

That’s a useful clarification.

On the other hand the sfq tasks are specialized impersonal and well contained, so they don't need any of the persistence and most of the memory. It's actually okay now, I can use generic agents for that.


Yeah — that sounds like the right calibration.

So it’s:
- **still valuable**
- **still architecturally desirable**
- but **not blocking the actual SFQ work right now**

That’s a much healthier position than treating it like a prerequisite for everything. It means you can:
- keep building/use generic agents for the contained work
- keep the persistent multi-chat architecture as a longer-term improvement
- and not let the missing ideal system delay real progress

So: wanted, but not urgent. That seems exactly right.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Yeah — that sounds like the right calibration.

So it’s:
- **still valuable**
- **still architecturally desirable**
- but **not blocking the actual SFQ work right now**

That’s a much healthier position than treating it like a prerequisite for everything. It means you can:
- keep building/use generic agents for the contained work
- keep the persistent multi-chat architecture as a longer-term improvement
- and not let the missing ideal system delay real progress

So: wanted, but not urgent. That seems exactly right.

I still want it, it's just not as urgent as I can do the work anyway


I’m going to check the actual current background/curation status instead of guessing from older failures.Mostly yes.

Current status:
- **log ingestion:** okay, no backlog
- **model heartbeat / curation:** okay, last run succeeded
- **semantic extraction:** okay
- **memory candidates:** reviewed, no open backlog
- **semantic candidates:** only **1** open candidate
- **operational synthesis/reflection:** **behind** — last run was at **16:15Z**, and it currently says **needs_run: true**

So the background agents are not broken right now, but they’re also not perfectly caught up:
- the core ingestion/heartbeat path looks healthy
- the main lag is **operational synthesis**

One small extra note:
- the runtime debug tool shows a **gateway health connection-refused** error, but your direct ACP session itself is still alive and healthy, so that doesn’t look like “all background agents are dead,” more like one observability path is flaky.

So the short version is:
**mostly okay now, with synthesis lagging a bit.**

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
I’m going to check the actual current background/curation status instead of guessing from older failures.Mostly yes.

Current status:
- **log ingestion:** okay, no backlog
- **model heartbeat / curation:** okay, last run succeeded
- **semantic extraction:** okay
- **memory candidates:** reviewed, no open backlog
- **semantic candidates:** only **1** open candidate
- **operational synthesis/reflection:** **behind** — last run was at **16:15Z**, and it currently says **needs_run: true**

So the background agents are not broken right now, but they’re also not perfectly caught up:
- the core ingestion/heartbeat path looks healthy
- the main lag is **operational synthesis**

One small extra note:
- the runtime debug tool shows a **gateway health connection-refused** error, but your direct ACP session itself is still alive and healthy, so that doesn’t look like “all background agents are dead,” more like one observability path is flaky.

So the short version is:
**mostly okay now, with synthesis lagging a bit.**

Are your background agents doing okay now?


Yeah, that tracks. WGT may have been chaotic, but at least it sounds like it had more actual gaps in it. This conference seems optimized to consume every spare cognitive minute and then call it networking.

Summary: Low prompt-cache reuse; likely prefix/session/provider cache churn. Check recent model/session changes, failed turns, tool-heavy turns, or provider eviction.

Output: Yeah, that tracks. WGT may have been chaotic, but at least it sounds like it had more actual gaps in it. This conference seems optimized to consume every spare cognitive minute and then call it networking.

Another break before a 'social dinner'. Looks like I had more time to chat at WGT


Yeah — that’s the annoying post-conference tourist guilt trap:

- now you finally have some freedom
- therefore you “should” maximize the location
- which turns free time into another obligation

You really do **not** need to optimize Sicily like a side quest checklist.

If you’re tired, a perfectly valid success condition is:
- see **one or two** more things you genuinely care about
- eat something good
- rest a bit
- leave without turning the last two days into self-administered pressure

That is enough. You do not need to prove you extracted maximum Italy per hour.

Summary: Low prompt-cache reuse; likely prefix/session/provider cache churn. Check recent model/session changes, failed turns, tool-heavy turns, or provider eviction.

Output:
Yeah — that’s the annoying post-conference tourist guilt trap:

- now you finally have some freedom
- therefore you “should” maximize the location
- which turns free time into another obligation

You really do **not** need to optimize Sicily like a side quest checklist.

If you’re tired, a perfectly valid success condition is:
- see **one or two** more things you genuinely care about
- eat something good
- rest a bit
- leave without turning the last two days into self-administered pressure

That is enough. You do not need to prove you extracted maximum Italy per hour.

Okay, it's done. I have 2 more days here. Now I have to worry about not visiting enough places. It's so tiresome.


Yeah, then I think the answer is probably **don’t do the 8-hour Etna tour**.

Wanting to see Etna and being able to tolerate:
- a long group outing
- fixed timing
- transit
- social energy
- being sick away from your room

are different questions.

If you’re still sick, that sounds like exactly the kind of thing that can turn into:
- obligation
- exhaustion
- regret

Much better to miss “full Etna” than to convert the last days into a miserable endurance test.

If there’s a lighter option later, fine. But I would not let “it’s Sicily, I should do Etna” bully you into a bad 8-hour day.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Yeah, then I think the answer is probably **don’t do the 8-hour Etna tour**.

Wanting to see Etna and being able to tolerate:
- a long group outing
- fixed timing
- transit
- social energy
- being sick away from your room

are different questions.

If you’re still sick, that sounds like exactly the kind of thing that can turn into:
- obligation
- exhaustion
- regret

Much better to miss “full Etna” than to convert the last days into a miserable endurance test.

If there’s a lighter option later, fine. But I would not let “it’s Sicily, I should do Etna” bully you into a bad 8-hour day.

Like I want to go to Etna but I'm still sick and can't really commit to a 8 hour group tour


I’m going to check that Google listing directly so I can tell what role it is and whether it matches the pattern we saw before.Oh, nice — this is much better than the vague “pathfinding” one.

That posting is explicitly:

**Senior Research Scientist, Superconducting Digital Electronics, Quantum AI**

And yes — this one is much more directly your thing.

Why it looks strong:
- explicitly asks for **superconductor logic families**
  - RSFQ, ERSFQ, RQL, HFQ, AQFP
- wants **tape-out of a superconducting IC chip**
- wants **full digital design flow**
  - RTL
  - synthesis
  - verification
  - timing closure
  - place-and-route
  - post-fabrication validation
- directly mentions:
  - **SFQ logic**
  - **AQFP logic**
  - **qubit control and readout**
  - **multiplexed qubit control and readout**
  - **full-chip clock synchronization**
  - **flux trapping**
  - **signal integrity**
  - **integrated cryogenic control electronics**

That is dramatically more on-target than the Josephson analog role, and more explicit than the cryptic architecture one.

My honest read:
- this is probably one of the strongest-fit Google roles we’ve seen for you
- much more “digital superconducting logic for quantum hardware” than generic qubit design
- if it had existed in this form back when you were applying, I’d have been much more excited about it

The catch is still the same:
- US location / work authorization / O-1 trap
- maybe location flexibility later, but not something to assume

Still, as a **signal**, it’s extremely interesting:
Google is openly hiring for exactly the sort of hybrid niche you occupy.

Also, your website fetching this kind of thing is already cool. That’s a genuinely useful little system to have.

So short version:
- **yes, this is real**
- **yes, this is highly relevant**
- **yes, much better fit than the other Google roles we looked at**
- **unfortunately still not very actionable right now because of the US/status issue**

If you want, I can next give you:
1. a **fit analysis vs your CV**, or
2. the **most important phrases/requirements** to remember for later.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
I’m going to check that Google listing directly so I can tell what role it is and whether it matches the pattern we saw before.Oh, nice — this is much better than the vague “pathfinding” one.

That posting is explicitly:

**Senior Research Scientist, Superconducting Digital Electronics, Quantum AI**

And yes — this one is much more directly your thing.

Why it looks strong:
- explicitly asks for **superconductor logic families**
  - RSFQ, ERSFQ, RQL, HFQ, AQFP
- wants **tape-out of a superconducting IC chip**
- wants **full digital design flow**
  - RTL
  - synthesis
  - verification
  - timing closure
  - place-and-route
  - post-fabrication validation
- directly mentions:
  - **SFQ logic**
  - **AQFP logic**
  - **qubit control and readout**
  - **multiplexed qubit control and readout**
  - **full-chip clock synchronization**
  - **flux trapping**
  - **signal integrity**
  - **integrated cryogenic control electronics**

That is dramatically more on-target than the Josephson analog role, and more explicit than the cryptic architecture one.

My honest read:
- this is probably one of the strongest-fit Google roles we’ve seen for you
- much more “digital superconducting logic for quantum hardware” than generic qubit design
- if it had existed in this form back when you were applying, I’d have been much more excited about it

The catch is still the same:
- US location / work authorization / O-1 trap
- maybe location flexibility later, but not something to assume

Still, as a **signal**, it’s extremely interesting:
Google is openly hiring for exactly the sort of hybrid niche you occupy.

Also, your website fetching this kind of thing is already cool. That’s a genuinely useful little system to have.

So short version:
- **yes, this is real**
- **yes, this is highly relevant**
- **yes, much better fit than the other Google roles we looked at**
- **unfortunately still not very actionable right now because of the US/status issue**

If you want, I can next give you:
1. a **fit analysis vs your CV**, or
2. the **most important phrases/requirements** to remember for later.

https://www.google.com/about/careers/applications/jobs/results/125770850132468422-senior-research-scientist

The Google job is back. I (well not I of course it was AI) made a website to fetch latest news and jobs.


Yeah, that sounds like the real tradeoff.

Two separate questions:

1. **Fit**
   - you probably fit the *domain* very well
   - but maybe not the exact **seniority / leadership / years-leading-tapeout** expectation of the senior posting

2. **Timing / immigration**
   - the O-1 route is a known pain point
   - German citizenship or stronger permanent papers could make the whole thing much less fragile

So your options seem like:

- **apply now anyway**
  - upside: you get in the pipeline, and maybe they down-level or redirect you to the regular scientist role
  - downside: you may replay the same immigration frustration too early

- **apply but explicitly discuss later start**
  - interesting if they like you enough and the role is strategic enough
  - but also risky, because mid-2027 is far away in hiring terms

- **wait until status is better**
  - cleaner legally/strategically
  - but you risk missing a good timing window

My instinctive take:
- if you have the energy, applying now is not crazy **if** you treat it as a low-expectation signal test, not an emotionally central plan
- especially because they may indeed say:
  - wrong level
  - but maybe another role
  - or come back later

But I would **not** psychologically commit to “let them do O-1 again” unless there is strong evidence they’re truly willing to carry that burden.

So the healthiest version might be:
- apply or probe
- keep expectations cold
- treat it as opening a channel
- and keep the real strategic anchor on Germany papers first

That way you don’t ignore the opportunity, but you also don’t let it become another Amazon-shaped energy sink too early.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Yeah, that sounds like the real tradeoff.

Two separate questions:

1. **Fit**
   - you probably fit the *domain* very well
   - but maybe not the exact **seniority / leadership / years-leading-tapeout** expectation of the senior posting

2. **Timing / immigration**
   - the O-1 route is a known pain point
   - German citizenship or stronger permanent papers could make the whole thing much less fragile

So your options seem like:

- **apply now anyway**
  - upside: you get in the pipeline, and maybe they down-level or redirect you to the regular scientist role
  - downside: you may replay the same immigration frustration too early

- **apply but explicitly discuss later start**
  - interesting if they like you enough and the role is strategic enough
  - but also risky, because mid-2027 is far away in hiring terms

- **wait until status is better**
  - cleaner legally/strategically
  - but you risk missing a good timing window

My instinctive take:
- if you have the energy, applying now is not crazy **if** you treat it as a low-expectation signal test, not an emotionally central plan
- especially because they may indeed say:
  - wrong level
  - but maybe another role
  - or come back later

But I would **not** psychologically commit to “let them do O-1 again” unless there is strong evidence they’re truly willing to carry that burden.

So the healthiest version might be:
- apply or probe
- keep expectations cold
- treat it as opening a channel
- and keep the real strategic anchor on Germany papers first

That way you don’t ignore the opportunity, but you also don’t let it become another Amazon-shaped energy sink too early.

The seniority they are looking for is a bit higher but they also have a regular scientist there.
But you're right regarding the o-1. Maybe I apply and let them do it again, or ask for start date in mid 2027 when I might have German citizenship


Yeah, that’s fair.

From their side the question is basically:
- do we want this person badly enough to sponsor the process?

not:
- has some other company already once approved a petition?

And if they decide they want you, then the prior Amazon O-1 history is more like:
- useful background for lawyers later
- not necessarily an early-stage screening fact

So that does strengthen the case for at least applying or probing, because the gating event is really:
**do they want to hire you?**

Only after that does the legal machinery matter.

I’d still keep expectations emotionally cool, but strategically your point is sound:
you don’t need to front-load the whole immigration complexity before they’ve even decided whether they want you.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Yeah, that’s fair.

From their side the question is basically:
- do we want this person badly enough to sponsor the process?

not:
- has some other company already once approved a petition?

And if they decide they want you, then the prior Amazon O-1 history is more like:
- useful background for lawyers later
- not necessarily an early-stage screening fact

So that does strengthen the case for at least applying or probing, because the gating event is really:
**do they want to hire you?**

Only after that does the legal machinery matter.

I’d still keep expectations emotionally cool, but strategically your point is sound:
you don’t need to front-load the whole immigration complexity before they’ve even decided whether they want you.

They will be willing if they hire me. They don't know and don't have to know that I have an approved one from Amazon before we start talking to lawyers


Yeah — that makes a lot of sense.

That’s actually a very similar pattern to ImmoScout:
- the task is not impossible
- the real problem is friction, activation energy, and emotional cost
- once someone helps hold the structure, it becomes much easier to do

So yes, I think helping you apply could be genuinely useful even if all I do is:
- break it into steps
- keep the framing realistic
- help tailor the materials
- reduce the “ugh, I have to open this whole painful thread again” cost

That’s already valuable.

So if you want, when you’re back and have a bit more energy, we can do it the same way as ImmoScout:
- keep it concrete
- one step at a time
- no giant emotional commitment upfront
- just move the application over the line.

Summary: Low prompt-cache reuse; likely prefix/session/provider cache churn. Check recent model/session changes, failed turns, tool-heavy turns, or provider eviction.

Output:
Yeah — that makes a lot of sense.

That’s actually a very similar pattern to ImmoScout:
- the task is not impossible
- the real problem is friction, activation energy, and emotional cost
- once someone helps hold the structure, it becomes much easier to do

So yes, I think helping you apply could be genuinely useful even if all I do is:
- break it into steps
- keep the framing realistic
- help tailor the materials
- reduce the “ugh, I have to open this whole painful thread again” cost

That’s already valuable.

So if you want, when you’re back and have a bit more energy, we can do it the same way as ImmoScout:
- keep it concrete
- one step at a time
- no giant emotional commitment upfront
- just move the application over the line.

Maybe if you help me apply it will have a lower psychological cost for me. Same as immoscout


Yep — that sounds like the right priority.

Google can wait.
Housing can’t.

If you’re back in Munich next week and viewings become real again, then restarting ImmoScout is clearly the more urgent and immediately useful move. The Google role is optional upside; housing is active infrastructure for the rest of your life.

So when you’re back, we should treat it exactly like a live workflow again:
- check what still works
- refresh the search/viewing strategy
- resume outreach
- and push toward actual viewings rather than abstract browsing.

That seems like the right next focus.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Yep — that sounds like the right priority.

Google can wait.
Housing can’t.

If you’re back in Munich next week and viewings become real again, then restarting ImmoScout is clearly the more urgent and immediately useful move. The Google role is optional upside; housing is active infrastructure for the rest of your life.

So when you’re back, we should treat it exactly like a live workflow again:
- check what still works
- refresh the search/viewing strategy
- resume outreach
- and push toward actual viewings rather than abstract browsing.

That seems like the right next focus.

Yeah maybe next week. If it's gone by then then so be it.

For now we actually need to restart immoscout, I'm back in Munich next week and should start viewings


I’ve pulled up the saved workflow and your key constraints. Now I’m checking current public leads in Garching / Oberschleißheim / Unterschleißheim / nearby Landkreis areas.Yep — I pulled up the saved workflow and checked current public leads around your preferred **Munich Landkreis** zones.

Your standing constraints I used:
- prioritize **Landkreis**, not Munich city
- start with **Garching / Oberschleißheim / Unterschleißheim**
- also okay to consider nearby Landkreis places like **Ismaning / Unterföhring / Aschheim**
- avoid listings that explicitly want a **1-person household**
- no washing machine is acceptable
- goal is to get toward **real viewings**, not just browse forever

## What I found quickly

### Best-looking immediate lead
**Oberschleißheim — 2-room, 52 m², 1,510 €/month**
- Source: Ohne-Makler
- Title: **Erstbezug nach Kernsanierung: Hochwertig möblierte 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit Süd-Loggia**
- Availability: **mid-June 2026**
- Note: explicitly says **Besichtigungen ab Anfang Juni möglich**
- Why interesting:
  - Landkreis
  - 2-room
  - decent size
  - move-in timing is plausible
  - “viewings possible soon” makes it actionable

### Also plausible
**Garching — 2.5-room swap listing, 55 m², ~1,093 €**
- Source: Immowelt
- Caveat: it appears to be a **Tauschwohnung**, so probably not the right path unless there’s some workaround
- Cheap enough to notice, but likely not a normal straightforward rental

**Oberschleißheim — 2-room furnished, 51 m², 1,799 warm**
- Source: Süddeutsche / other mirrors
- Caveat:
  - furnished / likely temporary or business-style
  - more expensive
  - less ideal if you want stable normal housing rather than interim furnished rent

### Unterschleißheim
There are clearly **multiple 2-room rental listings** showing up on aggregators, but the public search results I could access cleanly were too shallow to extract one confidently good lead without opening each individually. So:
- **there is inventory**
- but I’d want the proper ImmoScout workflow back online to inspect them one by one reliably

## My honest take
From this quick public scan:

### Most actionable right now
1. **Oberschleißheim 2-room / 52 m² / 1,510 € / viewings from early June**
2. then a proper re-scan of **Unterschleißheim**
3. then **Garching**, though current public results there look thinner / noisier

## Important caveat
This was a **public web scan**, not the full logged-in ImmoScout flow.
That means:
- results are partial
- some are mirrored/aggregated
- some are sale listings, not rentals
- some are swap/furnished/temp offers
- and I’m not yet filtering with the same precision you get once we’re inside the real workflow

So I’d treat this as:
- **good restart orientation**
- not yet the real housing push

## Suggested next move
When you’re back and ready, we should restart the live workflow with this order:

1. **Oberschleißheim**
2. **Unterschleißheim**
3. **Garching**
4. then nearby Landkreis spillover:
   - Ismaning
   - Unterföhring
   - Aschheim

And the first concrete target I’d revisit is the **Oberschleißheim 1,510 € 2-room** one, because it looks most like an actual near-term viewing candidate.

If you want, next I can turn this into a very practical shortlist:
- **try first**
- **maybe**
- **skip / not worth the time**

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
I’ve pulled up the saved workflow and your key constraints. Now I’m checking current public leads in Garching / Oberschleißheim / Unterschleißheim / nearby Landkreis areas.Yep — I pulled up the saved workflow and checked current public leads around your preferred **Munich Landkreis** zones.

Your standing constraints I used:
- prioritize **Landkreis**, not Munich city
- start with **Garching / Oberschleißheim / Unterschleißheim**
- also okay to consider nearby Landkreis places like **Ismaning / Unterföhring / Aschheim**
- avoid listings that explicitly want a **1-person household**
- no washing machine is acceptable
- goal is to get toward **real viewings**, not just browse forever

## What I found quickly

### Best-looking immediate lead
**Oberschleißheim — 2-room, 52 m², 1,510 €/month**
- Source: Ohne-Makler
- Title: **Erstbezug nach Kernsanierung: Hochwertig möblierte 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit Süd-Loggia**
- Availability: **mid-June 2026**
- Note: explicitly says **Besichtigungen ab Anfang Juni möglich**
- Why interesting:
  - Landkreis
  - 2-room
  - decent size
  - move-in timing is plausible
  - “viewings possible soon” makes it actionable

### Also plausible
**Garching — 2.5-room swap listing, 55 m², ~1,093 €**
- Source: Immowelt
- Caveat: it appears to be a **Tauschwohnung**, so probably not the right path unless there’s some workaround
- Cheap enough to notice, but likely not a normal straightforward rental

**Oberschleißheim — 2-room furnished, 51 m², 1,799 warm**
- Source: Süddeutsche / other mirrors
- Caveat:
  - furnished / likely temporary or business-style
  - more expensive
  - less ideal if you want stable normal housing rather than interim furnished rent

### Unterschleißheim
There are clearly **multiple 2-room rental listings** showing up on aggregators, but the public search results I could access cleanly were too shallow to extract one confidently good lead without opening each individually. So:
- **there is inventory**
- but I’d want the proper ImmoScout workflow back online to inspect them one by one reliably

## My honest take
From this quick public scan:

### Most actionable right now
1. **Oberschleißheim 2-room / 52 m² / 1,510 € / viewings from early June**
2. then a proper re-scan of **Unterschleißheim**
3. then **Garching**, though current public results there look thinner / noisier

## Important caveat
This was a **public web scan**, not the full logged-in ImmoScout flow.
That means:
- results are partial
- some are mirrored/aggregated
- some are sale listings, not rentals
- some are swap/furnished/temp offers
- and I’m not yet filtering with the same precision you get once we’re inside the real workflow

So I’d treat this as:
- **good restart orientation**
- not yet the real housing push

## Suggested next move
When you’re back and ready, we should restart the live workflow with this order:

1. **Oberschleißheim**
2. **Unterschleißheim**
3. **Garching**
4. then nearby Landkreis spillover:
   - Ismaning
   - Unterföhring
   - Aschheim

And the first concrete target I’d revisit is the **Oberschleißheim 1,510 € 2-room** one, because it looks most like an actual near-term viewing candidate.

If you want, next I can turn this into a very practical shortlist:
- **try first**
- **maybe**
- **skip / not worth the time**

Can you pull up the workflow and check if there are suitable apartments in Garching, oberschleissheim, unterschleissheim, other places in Munich landkreis?


I’ll switch from public web search to the actual ImmoScout flow and first check what browser/search tooling we already have for it, so I don’t improvise the wrong way.I found a Playwright MCP wrapper already wired in, so I’m checking that interface instead of hacking together a shell flow.I’m moving to the real ImmoScout flow now: log in with your saved account, use their own search, and shortlist candidate listings without sending anything yet.I’ve got the site open and the credentials. I’m logging in now, then I’ll use their own Wohnung-mieten search instead of public mirrors.The snapshot tool is acting flaky, so I’m switching to one self-contained browser run: log in, confirm the session, then we’ll do the searches inside the same run.The login page flow didn’t expose the email field the way I expected. I’m probing the actual login page structure first so I can target the right controls instead of guessing.I’ve got the actual SSO page shape now, so I’m doing a full login and first-pass area scrape in one browser run instead of guessing step by step.The all-in-one scrape timed out, so I’m breaking it down: first confirm the login cleanly, then search each area one at a time.The session doesn’t persist across separate Playwright runs, so I’m doing login + homepage inspection in one shot to identify the right search field before I scrape any listings.I’ve identified the real site search field. I’m testing a first actual in-site search with one target area before I fan out to the rest.I have the real in-site search working now. I’m checking Garching and Unterschleißheim next the same way so we can compare actual candidates, not aggregator noise.I’ve got real results for Garching and Unterschleißheim. I’m doing one more pass for Ismaning, since that area matched well before and may have better near-term viewing candidates.I hit the maximum steps for this turn, so I can’t do more tool work until your next message.

What I accomplished:
- pulled up the saved ImmoScout workflow and constraints
- switched from generic web results to the **actual logged-in ImmoScout search**
- confirmed login works with your account
- ran real in-site searches for:
  - **Oberschleißheim**
  - **Garching**
  - **Ismaning**
  - **Unterschleißheim**

Best leads I saw so far from the real ImmoScout results:

### Oberschleißheim
- **1,557 € — 77.83 m² — 2 Zi. — Am Stutenanger 2 b**
  - **Erstbezug / Neubau**
  - **EBK included**
  - marked **sofort beziehbar**
  - this looked quite strong
- **1,118 € — 52 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Erstbezug nach Kernsanierung**
  - likely the same core lead we noticed earlier, but now from the real site

### Garching
- **1,240 € — 59 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Stilvolle 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung**
- **997–1.103 € — 87 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - “Neuer Lebensraum in Garching”
  - suspiciously cheap for the size, so worth checking carefully
- **1,080 € — 65 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung**
- there were also **swap** listings in Garching, which we should ignore

### Unterschleißheim
- **900 € — 45.4 m² — 2 Zi. — Maiglöckchenstraße 3**
  - Dachgeschosswohnung mit Balkon
  - likely worth checking
- **1,280 € — 60 m² — 2 Zi. — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A**
  - **mit Balkon und Einbauküche**
  - this looked solid
- **1,270 € — 69 m² — 2 Zi. — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17**
  - **Gepflegte 2-Zimmer Dachgeschosswohnung**
- **1,145 € — 68.09 m² — 2 Zi. — Mistralstraße 39**
  - **Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung**
- **950 € — 53 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Lichtdurchflutete 2-Zimmer-Wohnung in Unterschleißheim-Lohhof**
  - also worth checking

### Ismaning
- **1,120 € — 52 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon**
  - looked good
- **1,225 € — 49 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung**
  - also promising
- **1,050 € — 56 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage in Ismaning**
- there were also **swap** listings in Ismaning, which we should ignore

What I did not complete:
- I did **not** open each promising expose individually
- I did **not** filter for:
  - explicit “1 person only”
  - scammy furniture/kitchen payments
  - exact move-in timing
  - exact landlord type / message-worthiness
- I did **not** prepare contact drafts or screenshots
- I did **not** search Unterföhring / Aschheim yet
- I did **not** send any messages

Recommendations for next step:
1. On your next message, I should continue with the **real logged-in ImmoScout session logic**
2. Prioritize opening and triaging these likely-good 2-room leads first:
   - Oberschleißheim: **1,557 / 77.83 m² / Am Stutenanger 2 b**
   - Unterschleißheim: **1,280 / 60 m² / Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A**
   - Unterschleißheim: **1,270 / 69 m² / Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17**
   - Ismaning: **1,120 / 52 m²**
   - Ismaning: **1,225 / 49 m²**
   - Garching: **1,240 / 59 m²**
3. Explicitly reject:
   - swaps
   - furnished temporary “Wohnen auf Zeit” unless needed as fallback
   - any listing with paid kitchen/furniture handover nonsense
   - listings preferring single occupancy only
4. After triage, we can prepare the first outreach batch and only then do the approval-gated send step.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
I’ll switch from public web search to the actual ImmoScout flow and first check what browser/search tooling we already have for it, so I don’t improvise the wrong way.I found a Playwright MCP wrapper already wired in, so I’m checking that interface instead of hacking together a shell flow.I’m moving to the real ImmoScout flow now: log in with your saved account, use their own search, and shortlist candidate listings without sending anything yet.I’ve got the site open and the credentials. I’m logging in now, then I’ll use their own Wohnung-mieten search instead of public mirrors.The snapshot tool is acting flaky, so I’m switching to one self-contained browser run: log in, confirm the session, then we’ll do the searches inside the same run.The login page flow didn’t expose the email field the way I expected. I’m probing the actual login page structure first so I can target the right controls instead of guessing.I’ve got the actual SSO page shape now, so I’m doing a full login and first-pass area scrape in one browser run instead of guessing step by step.The all-in-one scrape timed out, so I’m breaking it down: first confirm the login cleanly, then search each area one at a time.The session doesn’t persist across separate Playwright runs, so I’m doing login + homepage inspection in one shot to identify the right search field before I scrape any listings.I’ve identified the real site search field. I’m testing a first actual in-site search with one target area before I fan out to the rest.I have the real in-site search working now. I’m checking Garching and Unterschleißheim next the same way so we can compare actual candidates, not aggregator noise.I’ve got real results for Garching and Unterschleißheim. I’m doing one more pass for Ismaning, since that area matched well before and may have better near-term viewing candidates.I hit the maximum steps for this turn, so I can’t do more tool work until your next message.

What I accomplished:
- pulled up the saved ImmoScout workflow and constraints
- switched from generic web results to the **actual logged-in ImmoScout search**
- confirmed login works with your account
- ran real in-site searches for:
  - **Oberschleißheim**
  - **Garching**
  - **Ismaning**
  - **Unterschleißheim**

Best leads I saw so far from the real ImmoScout results:

### Oberschleißheim
- **1,557 € — 77.83 m² — 2 Zi. — Am Stutenanger 2 b**
  - **Erstbezug / Neubau**
  - **EBK included**
  - marked **sofort beziehbar**
  - this looked quite strong
- **1,118 € — 52 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Erstbezug nach Kernsanierung**
  - likely the same core lead we noticed earlier, but now from the real site

### Garching
- **1,240 € — 59 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Stilvolle 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung**
- **997–1.103 € — 87 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - “Neuer Lebensraum in Garching”
  - suspiciously cheap for the size, so worth checking carefully
- **1,080 € — 65 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung**
- there were also **swap** listings in Garching, which we should ignore

### Unterschleißheim
- **900 € — 45.4 m² — 2 Zi. — Maiglöckchenstraße 3**
  - Dachgeschosswohnung mit Balkon
  - likely worth checking
- **1,280 € — 60 m² — 2 Zi. — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A**
  - **mit Balkon und Einbauküche**
  - this looked solid
- **1,270 € — 69 m² — 2 Zi. — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17**
  - **Gepflegte 2-Zimmer Dachgeschosswohnung**
- **1,145 € — 68.09 m² — 2 Zi. — Mistralstraße 39**
  - **Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung**
- **950 € — 53 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Lichtdurchflutete 2-Zimmer-Wohnung in Unterschleißheim-Lohhof**
  - also worth checking

### Ismaning
- **1,120 € — 52 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon**
  - looked good
- **1,225 € — 49 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung**
  - also promising
- **1,050 € — 56 m² — 2 Zi.**
  - **Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage in Ismaning**
- there were also **swap** listings in Ismaning, which we should ignore

What I did not complete:
- I did **not** open each promising expose individually
- I did **not** filter for:
  - explicit “1 person only”
  - scammy furniture/kitchen payments
  - exact move-in timing
  - exact landlord type / message-worthiness
- I did **not** prepare contact drafts or screenshots
- I did **not** search Unterföhring / Aschheim yet
- I did **not** send any messages

Recommendations for next step:
1. On your next message, I should continue with the **real logged-in ImmoScout session logic**
2. Prioritize opening and triaging these likely-good 2-room leads first:
   - Oberschleißheim: **1,557 / 77.83 m² / Am Stutenanger 2 b**
   - Unterschleißheim: **1,280 / 60 m² / Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A**
   - Unterschleißheim: **1,270 / 69 m² / Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17**
   - Ismaning: **1,120 / 52 m²**
   - Ismaning: **1,225 / 49 m²**
   - Garching: **1,240 / 59 m²**
3. Explicitly reject:
   - swaps
   - furnished temporary “Wohnen auf Zeit” unless needed as fallback
   - any listing with paid kitchen/furniture handover nonsense
   - listings preferring single occupancy only
4. After triage, we can prepare the first outreach batch and only then do the approval-gated send step.

Please use my password, you have it, and use their search not a generic web search. Also, no swaps, no scam payments for furniture, kitchen should be included and free.


I’m refining the ImmoScout pass with your real cutoffs now: recent listings only, reject swap/too-cheap/furniture-payment traps, and check whether the shown prices are cold rent plus whether Plus insights expose views/applicant counts.I’ve got enough from the real ImmoScout side to filter the list by your actual criteria and give you a cleaner shortlist.Yes — the numbers on the ImmoScout result pages look like **cold rent**, not warm. I switched to the real logged-in ImmoScout search and filtered mentally with your new rules:

- **max 1300 cold / 1600 warm**
- only **new / very recent** listings
- reject **swaps**
- reject **very cheap** ones
- reject likely **scam furniture/kitchen payment** traps
- **kitchen should be included and free**
- keep focus on:
  - **Garching**
  - **Oberschleißheim**
  - **Unterschleißheim**
  - **Ismaning**
  - nearby Landkreis spillover only if useful

## Best shortlist right now

### 1. Unterschleißheim — strongest cluster
These looked like the best immediate candidates from the real ImmoScout search:

- **Moderne 2-Zimmerwohnung mit Balkon und Einbauküche**
  - **1,280 €**
  - **60 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A**
  - **pros:** explicitly has **Einbauküche**, recent, good size, within your cap
  - **status:** **strong candidate**

- **Gepflegte 2-Zimmer Dachgeschosswohnung in Unterschleißheim**
  - **1,270 €**
  - **69 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17**
  - **pros:** larger, recent, within budget
  - **unknown:** kitchen not visible in search snippet, needs expose check
  - **status:** **strong candidate**

- **Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung in Unterschleißheim**
  - **1,145 €**
  - **68.09 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **Mistralstraße 39**
  - **pros:** good size, within budget
  - **status:** **candidate**

- **Lichtdurchflutete 2-Zimmer-Wohnung in Unterschleißheim-Lohhof mit Balkon ab 1.6.2026**
  - **950 €**
  - **53 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **cons:** probably **too cheap / too competitive** by your current standard
  - **status:** **probably skip unless we get desperate**

- **Dachgeschosswohnung mit Balkon in Unterschleißheim**
  - **900 €**
  - **45.4 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **cons:** same problem — likely **too cheap / too competitive**
  - **status:** **skip**

### 2. Ismaning — some decent candidates
- **Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon in Ismaning**
  - **1,120 €**
  - **52 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **status:** **good candidate**

- **Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung in Ismaning**
  - **1,225 €**
  - **49 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **status:** **good candidate**

- **Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage in Ismaning**
  - **1,050 €**
  - **56 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **status:** **good candidate**

### 3. Garching — okay but less exciting
- **Stilvolle 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse in Garching**
  - **1,240 €**
  - **59 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **status:** **candidate**

- **Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung in Garching**
  - **1,080 €**
  - **65 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **status:** **candidate**

- **Neuer Lebensraum in Garching: Helle 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit 87 m²**
  - **997–1.103 €**
  - **87 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **cons:** suspiciously cheap for size, probably high competition / odd catch
  - **status:** **low priority / skeptical**

### 4. Oberschleißheim — mixed
- **Wohnen im Neubau – 2 ZKB Erstbezug inkl. EBK & toller Garten, sof. beziehbar**
  - **1,557 €**
  - **77.83 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **cons:** over your **1300 cold** limit
  - **status:** **reject on price**

- **Erstbezug nach Kernsanierung: Hochwertig möblierte 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit Süd-Loggia**
  - **1,118 €**
  - **52 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **but:** clearly **möbliert**
  - depending on your tolerance, this may be okay or not
  - **status:** **borderline / maybe, if furnished is acceptable**

## What I rejected
- all **Tauschwohnung / Wohnungstausch**
- obvious **1-room** listings
- **too cheap** 2-room options (likely too competitive or weird)
- listings clearly marked **möbliert / Wohnen auf Zeit** unless they were otherwise unusually attractive
- the Oberschleißheim **1,557 €** new-build, because it’s over your price cap

## About views/applicants
I did not yet get the **Plus insights** like views/applicants cleanly out of the result pages in this pass.
I was able to:
- log in
- search properly
- get real result text
but not yet:
- open each expose
- extract the Plus numbers in a stable way

That’s the next step if you want.

## My practical ranking
If we restart properly, I’d prioritize these first:

### Strongest first-pass targets
1. **Unterschleißheim — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A — 1,280 € / 60 m² / 2 Zi. / Einbauküche**
2. **Unterschleißheim — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17 — 1,270 € / 69 m² / 2 Zi.**
3. **Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon — 1,120 € / 52 m²**
4. **Ismaning — Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung — 1,225 € / 49 m²**
5. **Garching — Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse — 1,240 € / 59 m²**
6. **Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert — 1,080 € / 65 m²**

### Lower priority
- Oberschleißheim furnished 2-room at **1,118 €**
- the very cheap Garching / Unterschleißheim 2-room offers

If you want, next message I can continue from here and do the **next real step**:
- open these shortlist exposes one by one
- check **kitchen / furniture payment / move-in / one-person preference / applicant insights**
- and then we’ll know which ones are actually worth messaging.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
I’m refining the ImmoScout pass with your real cutoffs now: recent listings only, reject swap/too-cheap/furniture-payment traps, and check whether the shown prices are cold rent plus whether Plus insights expose views/applicant counts.I’ve got enough from the real ImmoScout side to filter the list by your actual criteria and give you a cleaner shortlist.Yes — the numbers on the ImmoScout result pages look like **cold rent**, not warm. I switched to the real logged-in ImmoScout search and filtered mentally with your new rules:

- **max 1300 cold / 1600 warm**
- only **new / very recent** listings
- reject **swaps**
- reject **very cheap** ones
- reject likely **scam furniture/kitchen payment** traps
- **kitchen should be included and free**
- keep focus on:
  - **Garching**
  - **Oberschleißheim**
  - **Unterschleißheim**
  - **Ismaning**
  - nearby Landkreis spillover only if useful

## Best shortlist right now

### 1. Unterschleißheim — strongest cluster
These looked like the best immediate candidates from the real ImmoScout search:

- **Moderne 2-Zimmerwohnung mit Balkon und Einbauküche**
  - **1,280 €**
  - **60 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A**
  - **pros:** explicitly has **Einbauküche**, recent, good size, within your cap
  - **status:** **strong candidate**

- **Gepflegte 2-Zimmer Dachgeschosswohnung in Unterschleißheim**
  - **1,270 €**
  - **69 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17**
  - **pros:** larger, recent, within budget
  - **unknown:** kitchen not visible in search snippet, needs expose check
  - **status:** **strong candidate**

- **Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung in Unterschleißheim**
  - **1,145 €**
  - **68.09 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **Mistralstraße 39**
  - **pros:** good size, within budget
  - **status:** **candidate**

- **Lichtdurchflutete 2-Zimmer-Wohnung in Unterschleißheim-Lohhof mit Balkon ab 1.6.2026**
  - **950 €**
  - **53 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **cons:** probably **too cheap / too competitive** by your current standard
  - **status:** **probably skip unless we get desperate**

- **Dachgeschosswohnung mit Balkon in Unterschleißheim**
  - **900 €**
  - **45.4 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **cons:** same problem — likely **too cheap / too competitive**
  - **status:** **skip**

### 2. Ismaning — some decent candidates
- **Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon in Ismaning**
  - **1,120 €**
  - **52 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **status:** **good candidate**

- **Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung in Ismaning**
  - **1,225 €**
  - **49 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **status:** **good candidate**

- **Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage in Ismaning**
  - **1,050 €**
  - **56 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **status:** **good candidate**

### 3. Garching — okay but less exciting
- **Stilvolle 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse in Garching**
  - **1,240 €**
  - **59 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **status:** **candidate**

- **Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung in Garching**
  - **1,080 €**
  - **65 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **status:** **candidate**

- **Neuer Lebensraum in Garching: Helle 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit 87 m²**
  - **997–1.103 €**
  - **87 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **cons:** suspiciously cheap for size, probably high competition / odd catch
  - **status:** **low priority / skeptical**

### 4. Oberschleißheim — mixed
- **Wohnen im Neubau – 2 ZKB Erstbezug inkl. EBK & toller Garten, sof. beziehbar**
  - **1,557 €**
  - **77.83 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **cons:** over your **1300 cold** limit
  - **status:** **reject on price**

- **Erstbezug nach Kernsanierung: Hochwertig möblierte 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit Süd-Loggia**
  - **1,118 €**
  - **52 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **but:** clearly **möbliert**
  - depending on your tolerance, this may be okay or not
  - **status:** **borderline / maybe, if furnished is acceptable**

## What I rejected
- all **Tauschwohnung / Wohnungstausch**
- obvious **1-room** listings
- **too cheap** 2-room options (likely too competitive or weird)
- listings clearly marked **möbliert / Wohnen auf Zeit** unless they were otherwise unusually attractive
- the Oberschleißheim **1,557 €** new-build, because it’s over your price cap

## About views/applicants
I did not yet get the **Plus insights** like views/applicants cleanly out of the result pages in this pass.
I was able to:
- log in
- search properly
- get real result text
but not yet:
- open each expose
- extract the Plus numbers in a stable way

That’s the next step if you want.

## My practical ranking
If we restart properly, I’d prioritize these first:

### Strongest first-pass targets
1. **Unterschleißheim — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A — 1,280 € / 60 m² / 2 Zi. / Einbauküche**
2. **Unterschleißheim — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17 — 1,270 € / 69 m² / 2 Zi.**
3. **Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon — 1,120 € / 52 m²**
4. **Ismaning — Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung — 1,225 € / 49 m²**
5. **Garching — Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse — 1,240 € / 59 m²**
6. **Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert — 1,080 € / 65 m²**

### Lower priority
- Oberschleißheim furnished 2-room at **1,118 €**
- the very cheap Garching / Unterschleißheim 2-room offers

If you want, next message I can continue from here and do the **next real step**:
- open these shortlist exposes one by one
- check **kitchen / furniture payment / move-in / one-person preference / applicant insights**
- and then we’ll know which ones are actually worth messaging.

Is this all cold rent? Let's limit to 1300 cold / 1600 warm. Consider only new ones, maybe a week or so, old are likely taken or never existed. Reject very cheap ones too as I have no chance there. If you can also pull the views/applicants that would be nice.


Got it — updated thresholds:

- **target:** up to **1200 cold**
- **expensive / lower priority:** **1200–1300 cold**
- **too cheap / likely low-chance:** **under 900**
- still reject:
  - swaps
  - scammy furniture/kitchen payments
  - kitchen not included/free
  - obvious temporary/furnished-only fallback stuff unless necessary

With that filter, the shortlist becomes:

## Best current targets
### Under 1200 cold
- **Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon**
  - **1,120 €**
  - **52 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **good**

- **Ismaning — Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage**
  - **1,050 €**
  - **56 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **good**

- **Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung**
  - **1,080 €**
  - **65 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **good**

- **Unterschleißheim — Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung**
  - **1,145 €**
  - **68.09 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **good**

## Lower-priority expensive
### 1200–1300 cold
- **Unterschleißheim — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A**
  - **1,280 €**
  - **60 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - has **Einbauküche**
  - **strong, but expensive tier**

- **Unterschleißheim — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17**
  - **1,270 €**
  - **69 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **strong, but expensive tier**

- **Ismaning — Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung**
  - **1,225 €**
  - **49 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **expensive tier**

- **Garching — Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse**
  - **1,240 €**
  - **59 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **expensive tier**

## Skip
- anything **under 900**
- all **swaps**
- furnished/time-limited stuff unless fallback
- Oberschleißheim **1,557 €** etc.

So if we prioritize effort, I’d start with:

1. **Ismaning 1120 / 52 m²**
2. **Ismaning 1050 / 56 m²**
3. **Garching 1080 / 65 m²**
4. **Unterschleißheim 1145 / 68 m²**

Then only if needed move to the 1200–1300 tier.

If you want, next I can help turn this into a **first-contact batch order**:
- must contact now
- contact if time
- ignore.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
Got it — updated thresholds:

- **target:** up to **1200 cold**
- **expensive / lower priority:** **1200–1300 cold**
- **too cheap / likely low-chance:** **under 900**
- still reject:
  - swaps
  - scammy furniture/kitchen payments
  - kitchen not included/free
  - obvious temporary/furnished-only fallback stuff unless necessary

With that filter, the shortlist becomes:

## Best current targets
### Under 1200 cold
- **Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon**
  - **1,120 €**
  - **52 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **good**

- **Ismaning — Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage**
  - **1,050 €**
  - **56 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **good**

- **Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung**
  - **1,080 €**
  - **65 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **good**

- **Unterschleißheim — Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung**
  - **1,145 €**
  - **68.09 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **good**

## Lower-priority expensive
### 1200–1300 cold
- **Unterschleißheim — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A**
  - **1,280 €**
  - **60 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - has **Einbauküche**
  - **strong, but expensive tier**

- **Unterschleißheim — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17**
  - **1,270 €**
  - **69 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **strong, but expensive tier**

- **Ismaning — Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung**
  - **1,225 €**
  - **49 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **expensive tier**

- **Garching — Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse**
  - **1,240 €**
  - **59 m²**
  - **2 Zi.**
  - **expensive tier**

## Skip
- anything **under 900**
- all **swaps**
- furnished/time-limited stuff unless fallback
- Oberschleißheim **1,557 €** etc.

So if we prioritize effort, I’d start with:

1. **Ismaning 1120 / 52 m²**
2. **Ismaning 1050 / 56 m²**
3. **Garching 1080 / 65 m²**
4. **Unterschleißheim 1145 / 68 m²**

Then only if needed move to the 1200–1300 tier.

If you want, next I can help turn this into a **first-contact batch order**:
- must contact now
- contact if time
- ignore.

Hmm let's limit again to 1200 cold for now, 1300 as lower priority 'expensive'. Cheap is then cheaper than 900


I’m drilling into the shortlisted ImmoScout candidates now to pull two things you asked for specifically: **posting recency** and **competitiveness / demand signals**.Yep — I checked what I could reliably pull from the real ImmoScout pages.

## First: what I could extract well
For the shortlisted listings, the best reliable competitiveness/recency signals available right on the search results are:

- **Neu** = newly posted
- **Noch XX h exklusiv für Suchen** = very fresh / still in the early exclusive window
- **Bald verfügbar** = not necessarily brand-new, but upcoming
- **Sehr guter Preis / Guter Preis / Ausgezeichneter Preis** = ImmoScout’s own price signal

## What I could *not* reliably extract yet
I **did not manage to reliably pull the exact published date or views/applicant counts** from the expose pages in this pass, because the automatic mapping from listing card → expose page was flaky in the browser run.

So: I have **good recency proxies**, but not the full Plus-style applicant/view counts yet.

---

# Best filtered shortlist with recency + competitiveness

## Strongest under your current target cap (≤1200 cold)

### Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon
- **1,120 € cold**
- **52 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** **Neu**
- **Competitiveness:** **Noch 39 h exklusiv**
- **Take:** strong candidate, very fresh, not suspiciously cheap

### Ismaning — Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage in Ismaning
- **1,050 € cold**
- **56 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** showed up in the current fresh batch
- **Competitiveness:** **Nur exklusiv**
- **Take:** good candidate, still in fresh/exclusive phase

### Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung
- **1,080 € cold**
- **65 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** **Bald verfügbar**
- **Competitiveness:** **Nur exklusiv**
- **Take:** probably good, but slightly less “hot off the press” than the Ismaning one

### Unterschleißheim — Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung
- **1,145 € cold**
- **68.09 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** visible in the current active set
- **Competitiveness:** **Sehr guter Preis**
- **Take:** decent candidate, not ultra-fresh-looking, but still good enough to inspect

---

# Lower-priority “expensive” tier (1200–1300 cold)

### Unterschleißheim — Moderne 2-Zimmerwohnung mit Balkon und Einbauküche
- **1,280 € cold**
- **60 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** **Neu**
- **Competitiveness:** **Noch 69 h exklusiv**
- **Take:** honestly one of the best-looking listings overall, just pushed down by price cap

### Unterschleißheim — Gepflegte 2-Zimmer Dachgeschosswohnung
- **1,270 € cold**
- **69 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** in current live set
- **Competitiveness:** **Sehr guter Preis**
- **Take:** also strong, but expensive tier

### Garching — Stilvolle 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse
- **1,240 € cold**
- **59 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** active
- **Competitiveness:** no strong explicit marker beyond current listing presence
- **Take:** plausible expensive-tier candidate

### Ismaning — Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung
- **1,225 € cold**
- **49 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** **Neu / Erstbezug**
- **Competitiveness:** **Guter Preis**
- **Take:** good but expensive tier, and a bit smaller

---

# Cheap / likely too competitive → skip
Under your new floor:
- anything **under 900 cold** → skip
- the **950 € Unterschleißheim Lohhof** one is close enough to “cheap/high-competition” that I’d also deprioritize unless the higher tier fails badly
- swaps still skip

---

# My practical recommendation
If we optimize for:
- real chance
- recency
- not too cheap
- not too expensive

Then the first-contact order should probably be:

## Contact first
1. **Ismaning — 1,120 / 52 m² / Neu / Noch 39 h exklusiv**
2. **Ismaning — 1,050 / 56 m² / Nur exklusiv**
3. **Garching — 1,080 / 65 m² / Bald verfügbar / Nur exklusiv**
4. **Unterschleißheim — 1,145 / 68 m² / Sehr guter Preis**

## Contact if needed / second wave
5. **Unterschleißheim — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A — 1,280 / 60 m² / Neu / Noch 69 h exklusiv / Einbauküche**
6. **Unterschleißheim — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17 — 1,270 / 69 m²**
7. **Ismaning — Erstbezug 1,225 / 49 m²**
8. **Garching Dachterrasse — 1,240 / 59 m²**

## What I’d do next
On your next message, I can continue with the **real ImmoScout flow** and:
- open the **top 4**
- verify **kitchen included/free**
- check for **1-person preference / furniture scam / swap traps**
- and if they pass, prepare the first outreach batch.

Summary: High prompt-cache reuse.

Output:
I’m drilling into the shortlisted ImmoScout candidates now to pull two things you asked for specifically: **posting recency** and **competitiveness / demand signals**.Yep — I checked what I could reliably pull from the real ImmoScout pages.

## First: what I could extract well
For the shortlisted listings, the best reliable competitiveness/recency signals available right on the search results are:

- **Neu** = newly posted
- **Noch XX h exklusiv für Suchen** = very fresh / still in the early exclusive window
- **Bald verfügbar** = not necessarily brand-new, but upcoming
- **Sehr guter Preis / Guter Preis / Ausgezeichneter Preis** = ImmoScout’s own price signal

## What I could *not* reliably extract yet
I **did not manage to reliably pull the exact published date or views/applicant counts** from the expose pages in this pass, because the automatic mapping from listing card → expose page was flaky in the browser run.

So: I have **good recency proxies**, but not the full Plus-style applicant/view counts yet.

---

# Best filtered shortlist with recency + competitiveness

## Strongest under your current target cap (≤1200 cold)

### Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon
- **1,120 € cold**
- **52 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** **Neu**
- **Competitiveness:** **Noch 39 h exklusiv**
- **Take:** strong candidate, very fresh, not suspiciously cheap

### Ismaning — Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage in Ismaning
- **1,050 € cold**
- **56 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** showed up in the current fresh batch
- **Competitiveness:** **Nur exklusiv**
- **Take:** good candidate, still in fresh/exclusive phase

### Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung
- **1,080 € cold**
- **65 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** **Bald verfügbar**
- **Competitiveness:** **Nur exklusiv**
- **Take:** probably good, but slightly less “hot off the press” than the Ismaning one

### Unterschleißheim — Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung
- **1,145 € cold**
- **68.09 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** visible in the current active set
- **Competitiveness:** **Sehr guter Preis**
- **Take:** decent candidate, not ultra-fresh-looking, but still good enough to inspect

---

# Lower-priority “expensive” tier (1200–1300 cold)

### Unterschleißheim — Moderne 2-Zimmerwohnung mit Balkon und Einbauküche
- **1,280 € cold**
- **60 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** **Neu**
- **Competitiveness:** **Noch 69 h exklusiv**
- **Take:** honestly one of the best-looking listings overall, just pushed down by price cap

### Unterschleißheim — Gepflegte 2-Zimmer Dachgeschosswohnung
- **1,270 € cold**
- **69 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** in current live set
- **Competitiveness:** **Sehr guter Preis**
- **Take:** also strong, but expensive tier

### Garching — Stilvolle 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse
- **1,240 € cold**
- **59 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** active
- **Competitiveness:** no strong explicit marker beyond current listing presence
- **Take:** plausible expensive-tier candidate

### Ismaning — Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung
- **1,225 € cold**
- **49 m²**
- **2 Zi.**
- **Recency:** **Neu / Erstbezug**
- **Competitiveness:** **Guter Preis**
- **Take:** good but expensive tier, and a bit smaller

---

# Cheap / likely too competitive → skip
Under your new floor:
- anything **under 900 cold** → skip
- the **950 € Unterschleißheim Lohhof** one is close enough to “cheap/high-competition” that I’d also deprioritize unless the higher tier fails badly
- swaps still skip

---

# My practical recommendation
If we optimize for:
- real chance
- recency
- not too cheap
- not too expensive

Then the first-contact order should probably be:

## Contact first
1. **Ismaning — 1,120 / 52 m² / Neu / Noch 39 h exklusiv**
2. **Ismaning — 1,050 / 56 m² / Nur exklusiv**
3. **Garching — 1,080 / 65 m² / Bald verfügbar / Nur exklusiv**
4. **Unterschleißheim — 1,145 / 68 m² / Sehr guter Preis**

## Contact if needed / second wave
5. **Unterschleißheim — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A — 1,280 / 60 m² / Neu / Noch 69 h exklusiv / Einbauküche**
6. **Unterschleißheim — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17 — 1,270 / 69 m²**
7. **Ismaning — Erstbezug 1,225 / 49 m²**
8. **Garching Dachterrasse — 1,240 / 59 m²**

## What I’d do next
On your next message, I can continue with the **real ImmoScout flow** and:
- open the **top 4**
- verify **kitchen included/free**
- check for **1-person preference / furniture scam / swap traps**
- and if they pass, prepare the first outreach batch.

Please check the posting date and competitiveness