One of the central goals of neuroscience is to gain a mechanistic understanding of how the dynamics of neural circuits give rise to their observed function. A popular approach towards this end is to train recurrent neural networks (RNNs) to reproduce experimental recordings of neural activity. These trained RNNs are then treated as surrogate models of biological neural circuits, whose properties can be dissected via dynamical systems analysis. How reliable are the mechanistic insights derived from this procedure? While recent advances in population-level recording technologies have allowed simultaneous recording of up to tens of thousands of neurons, this represents only a tiny fraction of most cortical circuits. Here we show that observing only a subset of neurons in a circuit can create mechanistic mismatches between a simulated teacher network and a data-constrained student, even when the two networks have matching single-unit dynamics. Our results illustrate the challenges inherent in accurately uncovering neural mechanisms from single-trial data, and suggest the need for new methods of validating data-constrained models for neural dynamics.