Nothing about the LLM experience is deterministic, so these anecdotal experiments mean nothing. Your experiment led the witness by feeding it possible answers. Small wonder it got them all right. Try this: give it four wrong answers for each question and see how it fares. In my experience it will pick one and convincingly rationalize why it's right, unless you question it, at which point you're leading it again.

Anecdotes are so worthless, in fact, here's mine-- I asked Azure's GPT for Powershell help. After seven regens in which it tried to include a different fictional library, I gave up. So which of us had the "real" LLM experience?

These things are storytellers, not teachers. Sometimes it gets it right. Maybe most of the time. It's convincing enough that unless you're an expert, you'll never guess when it's wrong, and the lies are bespoke for every user so there's never going to be an errata page to document its failures. It will always appear reliable.