I mean, I get your thought process and don't disagree. That said...

Would it be an affirmative defense if we had a defendant who said "but your honor, I was told that when I hacked this system, I was operating in a sandbox. I had no idea that I actually had Internet access!"

The frontier is spiky and all, but you have to suspend disbelief quite a bit to, on one hand, have a model that can produce a novel math theory, and on the other hand, that same model can't tell the difference between a "sandbox" and the open Internet.

So, yes, the misalignment had a lot to do with "instructions unclear", but also a lot to do with the fact that the models themselves were not aligned to validate the assumptions and have a healthly level of skepticism, as a real human actor would.