Build a useful investigation brief
Build an alternative matrix
List competing explanations, predictions, supporting observations, contradicting observations, and current status. Include the consequence of each option and the evidence needed to separate them. Mark claims that remain true across all alternatives so the investigation preserves useful conclusions.
Trace evidence selection
Follow artifacts from source and time through filtering, sampling, calculation, and final wording. Check missing cohorts, contradictory records, stale context, measurement limits, and assumptions that prevent discrimination. Record exact inputs and revisions for every comparison.
Run the smallest discriminator
Choose a bounded fixture, paired cohort, controlled comparison, or owner clarification that predicts different outcomes for the alternatives. Execute it with fixed criteria and compare results. If no available test distinguishes them, record that as an evidence limit rather than a hidden conclusion.
What to carry forward
Produce an investigation brief with alternative matrix, evidence lineage, discriminating test, supported invariants, and unresolved boundary. Recommend a bounded next observation or explicit policy choice. Do not convert an inconclusive outcome into a root cause because one explanation feels more plausible.
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