Build a useful investigation brief
Build boundary fixtures
Prepare files below, exactly at, and above the documented limit, plus one file whose displayed decimal and binary values would differ. Record raw byte lengths and expected labels before selection so rounding cannot change the expected case.
Trace measurements
Capture size shown by the picker, client calculation, request metadata, receiver decision, validation result, and processing outcome. Compare raw bytes, units, and rounding at each boundary, noting where a contextual rule enters.
Explain the first difference
Identify the earliest measurement or decision that disagrees with the documented limit. Test whether the same file behaves differently in another workflow context and state that as a separate policy question when evidence shows intentional variation.
What to carry forward
The investigation is sufficient when boundary fixtures reveal the measurement and enforcement rule that users encounter. If the stated limit lacks a unit or context, deliver that ambiguity as the primary finding and avoid inferring which interpretation should win.
Technical background: MDN reference.
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