it seems to me that an important fragment of the condition was missed, the numbers must be consecutive , and the sequence of natural numbers is x , x+1 , x+2 and so on

OK, thank you

after a long discussion in discord, the community unanimously came to the conclusion that the condition does not require improvements

the description says that this is a sequence of consecutive numbers, and the numbers are natural, your interpretation destroys the sequence itself, and since your examples have a deviation modulus above one, they lose the very fact of a series of natural numbers, since in the series of natural numbers the deviation = 1

No need to apologize, this is my confusion, it may well be clear for others!

For me as a native English speaker, the description is clear enough to an extent. However, the examples are where the confusion lies, For example, you have provided this:

"Given a sequence of one or more 'consecutive natural numbers' concatenated into a string, return the smallest possible first number in the sequence."

"91011" -> [9, 10, 11] -> 9

Under which premise is this not [9,0,1,1] as a sequence? Both 1 and 9 are natural numbers with 1 being the smallest. However you have stated "smallest possible first number" Im not sure what you mean here, the smallest natural number or the first natural number of the sequence.

Given:

"121122123" -> [121, 122, 123] -> 121

Its not clear how you are choosing to group these numbers, there is no pattern here why is this not [1,2,1,1,2,2,1,2,3] or [12,11,22,12,3] ?

Of course this is my own confusion here, but I am struggling to follow how the challenge text and the examples fit together. The tests do not really help much in this case either.

Please note these examples are taken from your description, they are not mine

hello, I apologize for your dissatisfaction, but I do not quite understand what the problem is, could you explain in more detail which parts of the description you did not understand?