Except, why tarnish your own reputation? For true malicious compliance, you need to publish it not under your own name, but rather under the name of avian intelligence, and call it "100 ai-generated and completely untested slop tips on shadows and fire, compiled under the express direction of <Professor's Name>". The only part of it that shouldn't be AI-generated is the introduction and acknowledgements section, in which you publish every record of them demanding that you use this piece of shit, including each of your strenuous warnings.
In the acknowledgements section, point out five different times where the rituals will, if completed to the AI's specifications, cause the imminent demise of the reader. Thank AI and the professor who foisted it upon you for these "contributions". Offer no solutions, but suggest that volume 2 of the series will feature precisely zero avian intelligence, and will be written by you. Then, publish.
ETA: Source: Am chemistry teacher. Was handed ai-generated curriculum. Pointed out multiple different times when the curriculum could lead to the potential death of students or people in their care (as a representative sample, the curriculum said that one of the most common IV normal saline solution ingredients was KCl —the lethal ingredient in lethal injections— and there was a lab which called for students to boil 95% isopropanol on a hot plate at max heat —550C— outside of a fume hood, with no procedure or safety section). Am no longer expected to use AI slop curriculum. You have to make it clear that using this shit puts the institution into active legal jeopardy.