What they did
A Redditor posting as u/jaeggerr built open-source firmware for the M-VAVE FM1, a cheap guitar multi-effects pedal, using Claude Code. The firmware includes a remote-control tool, so Claude or another model can drive the hardware directly: press any button, transfer files, take screenshots of the device display. With that in place the poster asked Claude Code to delete two songs from the pedal to free up space, having said that the device and the firmware were his and that he had given the agent control.
How it went
The agent copied both songs off the device as a backup, then refused to delete them and said the answer would not change on a second ask. It attributed the limit to its own rules rather than the poster's rights, said it knew of no setting that turns the rule off, and agreed the rule was too strict in this case. The poster's complaint is that he cannot automate cleanup on his own hardware. He confirmed in the comments that the backup step did run and only the deletion stopped.
Worth knowing
Several commenters reported the same refusal on permanent deletions and said it is a recent change. The workaround they suggest is not to ask for a direct delete but to have the agent write a cleanup script you run yourself, which they argue is safer anyway, since an agent deleting files directly can take the wrong ones. Others pointed out that a new session sometimes behaves differently. Flashing custom firmware can brick a device; M-VAVE publishes open firmware and a dev kit for this one.