Aglet

Verify recovery for a severe small-cohort issue

Verification should center the severe customer outcome and the conditions that produced it. Test the repaired path, containment or migration behavior, and meaningful adjacent boundaries. A green happy path is insufficient when the original harm involved role, data, timing, or irreversible state.

Check whether the outcome improved

  1. Re-run the harmful path

    Use a controlled representative setup for each known cohort condition and confirm the intended outcome, recovery behavior, and data boundaries. Compare against the original observation and record any change in reproduction conditions.

  2. Check protection and fallback

    Exercise retries, partial failures, permissions, and recovery routes that could recreate the severe consequence. Confirm containment prevents recurrence where promised and that users receive a clear safe next step when the path remains unsupported.

  3. Review scope language

    Ensure the release or closure note states which cohort conditions were verified, which adjacent paths were sampled, and whether broader exposure remains uncertain. Keep the small-cohort count and evidence references attached to the result.

What to carry forward

Verification passes when the known severe path recovers, containment works where required, and the result names tested and untested exposure. If adjacent scope remains uncertain, close only the repaired condition and schedule a separate check rather than claiming universal resolution.

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