Aglet

How to investigate a first-use help path that dead-ends

Investigate help discovery by following a synthetic person from the confused page to a real destination and back to the task. Compare page state, route context, and available action at each hop. Possible causes include missing information architecture, stale links, a wrong workspace, or wording that promises a path the app does not expose.

Build a useful investigation brief

  1. Map the task path

    Write the current route, heading, state, role, visible link labels, destination, and return action for one task. Follow the path with a clean synthetic session and an established workspace. Record whether the destination answers the question or merely changes pages.

  2. Check destination authority

    Compare links with existing routes and policy boundaries before changing copy. Verify a setup action belongs to the same workspace and project. If an action is unavailable for the current role, record the permission result and a safe alternative rather than bypassing it.

  3. Test edge states

    Repeat from empty, validation-error, pending-verification, failed-check, and stale-link states where supported. Compare help label, context, and next action. Preserve unsupported or external behavior as unknown so an explanatory page does not become an invented feature promise.

What to carry forward

The investigation is ready when the task’s page state, link, destination, role, context, and return path are traceable for at least one reproducible variant. Deliver the first dead end or mismatch and name any destination the current app cannot provide.

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