Aglet

Learn from category search scope and boundary confusion

Scope lessons should preserve what the route promised and why a result was included or excluded. Compare later category and global journeys with the original matrix, then improve one review question about breadcrumbs, phrase handling, filters, or intentional broadening. The route and query should tell the same scope story.

Keep the lesson for the next incident

  1. Keep the route promise

    Record route, breadcrumb, category path, phrase, filters, sort, result types, and the expected scope. State what was unknown. This distinguishes a strict category decision from an accidental missing result. Keep the route promise explicit for reviewers.

  2. Compare later routes

    Review another category, global search, empty phrase, and direct link after the change. Look for a route whose labels or facets still imply a different universe. Preserve a working strict and broad path as controls.

  3. Refine one scope check

    Require future reviews to compare the same phrase from category and global entry, inspect URL and breadcrumb, and test the broaden action. Assign ownership and revisit date. Define the observation that would show the check prevented another scope dispute.

What to carry forward

The learning record connects one scope confusion to later route evidence and a reusable category-versus-global check. Stop when another reviewer can apply it to a new category. Carry forward uncertainty where route semantics or empty-query behavior remains undecided.

Technical background: Adobe developer documentation.

Keep the decision with the work.

Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.

Create an account See the product workflow