I've been playing Wordle since early January, and it's one of my favorite games (behind Spelling Bee). I've spent alot of time thinking through various strategies, and in fact wrote my own little solver many months ago.
Last month the New York times introduced "WordleBot". Available only to NY Times subscribers, it's a neat little tool which looks at your most recent game and offers some feedback on how you did, and how you could have done better.
It's fun to see how their solver attacked the problem, compare your approach to it, and see a bunch of underlying statistics on possible approaches. That said, it's got one little property to it that really annoys me.
To illustrate my point, let's look an example I captured a couple of weeks ago:
The key here is that when Wordle says there are only "five possible solutions", it's taking advantage of the fact that it knows this much smaller list. So when it says things like, "there's only one solution left so you should get it on the next turn" it's making an unrealistic assumption that the user also knows which of the 12947 words make up the list of possible solutions. This just feels unfair.
My suggestion is that the WordleBot would be on a more level playing field if it used the complete list of 5-letter words when narrowing down the list.