Build a useful investigation brief
Reconstruct the request
Collect task versions, stated outcomes, constraints, unchanged behavior, implementation notes, and owner decisions. Mark where verification language was absent, vague, or dropped during a scope change. Preserve timestamps and revisions so the gap is tied to a workflow boundary.
Map claims to checks
List each material implementation or recommendation claim and the check, artifact, comparison, or review that could support it. Identify claims with no observable criterion, evidence, owner, or failure handling. Note checks that cover a different behavior than the claim.
Test one acceptance case
Create a small representative case with expected outcome, boundary input, and failure condition. Apply the proposed plan or review it with a second engineer, then record ambiguity, unavailable evidence, and scope leak. Use the result to name the smallest missing plan element.
What to carry forward
Produce a verification investigation with task timeline, claim-to-check map, acceptance case, missing elements, and scope changes. Recommend a concrete criterion or evidence request. Do not infer that verification existed because an implementation description mentions tests without results, owner, or acceptance meaning.
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