How to use Comet to test coupons in a live cart
Comet tested CUTS coupons in a live cart and applied an $11.39 reduction; unrelated-product drift and separate-brand checkout limits remained visible.
linkedin.com
Original prompt
Shared by the source author. See source notes for context.
Find the best working discount codes for CUTS Clothing.
Reach people exploring AI agents
See placements →Evidence at a glance
Sourced account- Source author
- Dennis Yao Yu
- Original account
- Read the source ↗
- Published
- Source link checked
- Reported result
- A reported working coupon reduced the CUTS cart by $11.39; no paid order or completed cross-brand checkout is established.
- Human involvement
- The owner evaluated the applied cart reduction and identified scope drift; the desired budget and scope controls are not demonstrated as implemented.
A linked account supports attribution. It does not mean we independently reproduced its result.
Report an issue with this case
Open correction emailOpens your email app with the case link included. Nothing is sent automatically.
How the agent did it
- Yu requested working CUTS codes and Comet researched several coupon-source types.
- The agent tried candidates in the live cart and the author reports an applied $11.39 reduction.
- The owner observed unrelated-product drift and separate-brand cart and login limitations.
Dennis Yao Yu used Perplexity Comet to look for working CUTS Clothing discount codes. The useful action was testing candidates in the actual cart, rather than simply repeating a coupon site’s promise.
Comet opened sources including Reddit, blogs and influencer offers, then tried codes against the shopping session. The account reports a working DELOSREYES code and an $11.39 discount applied to the cart. It does not provide evidence that the purchase was subsequently paid for, so that amount is a cart reduction rather than verified money saved on an order.
The experiment also exposed scope drift. Comet wandered toward products from Amazon and Target that were outside the immediate request. An attempt to consolidate Gap and Banana Republic shopping ran into separate carts and login requirements instead of producing a single finished checkout.
Yu’s account therefore contains both a concrete coupon-testing result and boundaries that still needed work. He wanted firmer control over scope and budget, but does not show those controls being implemented. The practical evidence is a working cart discount, with broader shopping actions and completed payment left unresolved.
Prompt
Original prompt
Source: LinkedIn · Dennis Yao Yu
Frequently asked questions
Was the coupon only found in search?
No. The account describes testing codes in the live shopping cart.
Is the $11.39 a verified completed-order saving?
No. It is the reported cart reduction; a paid purchase is not shown.
What boundary problem did the experiment reveal?
The agent drifted toward unrelated products and could not unify separate brand carts without further login steps.
More details
About this account
Yu requested working CUTS codes and Comet researched several coupon-source types. The agent tried candidates in the live cart and the author reports an applied $11.39 reduction.
Full original dated article opened. Original prompt excerpt. Applied cart reduction is not recast as completed purchase savings; requested future scope and budget controls are not claimed as working features. Original prompt excerpt.
Credit: Dennis Yao Yu — LinkedIn
Source published
Added to Agents In Use
Source checked
Tools and topics
Perplexity Comet · CUTS Clothing website · Reddit · Shopping cart
coupon testing · scope drift · cart verification
Editorial completeness: 100/100. Measures documented fields, not agent performance or verified outcomes.