Pine Script Indicator TradingView

At the stage of selecting a contractor, I offered several candidates to complete a test task, which this contractor handled very quickly. It is possible that the solution was made with the help of ChatGPT to outpace competitors and take the assignment for themselves.

The contractor estimated the completion time for the task to be 7-10 days. Here we "shook hands." On the tenth day, the contractor contacted me and asked to participate in the process, as it was necessary to check the logic of the basic function displaying that zone on the chart, from which everything else in the technical specifications depends.
1. They were late with the submission,
2. did not mention that there were problems, and
3. did not warn about the delay.

Next. It is very important to emphasize that the contractor is overly confident in their Pine Script skills on the tradingview platform and creates the illusion that they can easily handle any task. This is not the case. As we got to know each other better, it became clear that communication was happening with an experienced project manager, but not with a programmer. Information is conveyed to the programmer as if it were hieroglyphs, which in turn the developer must decipher. The communication comes across as a different task. The reason lies in poor communication between departments, either due to the inexperience of the specialist or the entire team.

As for the UI indicator, the programmer did not have my task on their desk and thus started inventing the wheel here and there. The importance of changing the interface language to make it intuitive and logically structured was emphasized more than once. In the end, I received an untranslated indicator for testing with function names that are distressing. One of them is "trigger inside the bar (otherwise after closing)."

The programmer lacks a visual representation of the basic tradingview tool "Fibonacci Retracement." They have never seen it. Despite the existence of technical specifications, even after personal requests to make the fields and checkboxes as I needed, I still received "results" several times with an untranslated interface and ONE input field without changes (with unnecessary interface modifications). The programmer decided that values should be entered in one field separated by commas.

On the twenty-first day, a decision was made to stop the development of the indicator.

We submitted an application for this project and immediately received a test assignment, which we successfully completed, but not without some suspicions, as the client wanted to "make sure we could complete his project." After completing it and receiving the technical assignment, we "shook hands." On the second day, suggestions started coming in like "do it this way" and possibly "we will also need this and that," while the client himself rejected his own technical assignment, claiming that it was supposedly composed by a neural network. That is, in the first version of the indicator that was sent, it corresponded to 80% of everything in the technical assignment, but the client needed additional edits for completely new functions and a design that was not described in the technical assignment initially, because the technical assignment (once again) was composed by a neural network and not properly checked for completeness.

Additionally, outside of the technical assignment, more than half of the volume of the technical assignment was proposed, such settings as alerts of the type, Fibonacci (visual settings, zones, separately for each level) and an interface that was not described, we also noticed phrases like "today we do it this way" and "tomorrow we do it differently" from the client. Thus, the project understandably dragged on due to the constant desire to improve the interface, although this went beyond the scope of the task and did not correspond to the original goals.

The client extended the project twice, as the additional edits we agreed to make required time, but ultimately, after receiving a working indicator with most of the implemented functionality (aside from the interface) - he decided to finish it.