Aglet

Investigate notification permission timing through user journeys

An investigation should show whether a person understands why permission is requested and what remains possible after each result. Replay first visit, useful feature, and explicit opt-in paths, compare allow, deny, and dismiss, and keep platform behavior as an evidence boundary.

Build a useful investigation brief

  1. Build the prompt journey

    List entry page, feature action, rationale, prompt, allow, deny, dismiss, notification type, in-app status, and settings link. Include a path where no prompt appears. Record what the person knew before the request.

  2. Trace each result

    Follow allow, deny, and dismissal into the next screen and later settings. Compare delivery expectation, copy, recovery, and repeated prompt behavior. Record whether a denial blocks only a channel or also hides durable in-app history.

  3. Write the timing brief

    State first context loss, affected platform or route, and competing explanations. Recommend one user-driven timing or rationale experiment with a pass condition. Do not claim permission can be requested again when platform state is unobserved.

What to carry forward

The investigation is complete when trigger, rationale, result, and recovery are reproducible for selected journeys, or the first platform boundary is explicit. Stop with one bounded opt-in experiment. Preserve useful app state after denial in the brief.

Technical background: Chrome developer documentation.

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