Decide where the work belongs
Set evidence and severity bounds
State what the report proves, what it suggests, and what it cannot establish. Record the strongest plausible consequence as a hypothesis and avoid using missing detail as a reason to erase a credible customer cost.
Compare clarification value
Estimate how quickly one missing fact could distinguish workflows or raise confidence, then compare that effort with investigating the most harmful plausible path. Keep the comparison qualitative and tied to actual evidence gaps.
Choose the next queue action
Assign request detail, bounded reproduction, containment review, or deferral with an owner and trigger. Explain what would raise or lower priority, such as a second independent report or a confirmed blocked workflow.
What to carry forward
The output is a queue decision that names uncertainty, plausible harm, clarification value, and the next responsible action. Stop when the team can defend why it is gathering evidence or acting now; do not turn absent steps into an unsupported severity score.
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