Decide where the work belongs
Describe the trapped decision
Name what the selected combination was meant to find and what disappeared. Compare one extra filter that legitimately narrows results with a pair that cannot coexist. Keep repeated sequences distinct from a one-off unusual query.
Compare recovery sizes
Set clearer copy, removable filter chips, compatible facet guidance, alternative results, and data correction beside one another. Consider whether a broad fallback changes the person’s goal. Prefer a recovery that keeps intent visible rather than silently dropping a constraint.
Set the queue move
Choose the smallest next step, owner, and trigger. State the combinations in scope and what evidence would justify broader changes. Preserve the failing path and one valid control so the decision can be tested against the user’s actual narrowing work.
What to carry forward
Prioritize combinations that block a meaningful task and provide no honest recovery. The decision should state whether copy, interaction, or data scope is next. If the empty result is valid and explained, leave it visible and queue a different search issue only when evidence supports it.
Technical background: W3C guidance.
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