Aglet

Prioritize work with unclear acceptance criteria

Acceptance clarification can unblock work, prevent rework, or protect a high-risk release. Prioritization should weigh the cost of guessing against the cost of asking, then choose clarification, bounded implementation, or deferment with a clear decision owner. Clarify acceptance early when guessing could create rework, customer harm, or an irreversible decision.

Decide where the work belongs

  1. Assess the risk of guessing

    Identify customer harm, operational exposure, review burden, rework cost, dependencies, and irreversible changes that could result from the wrong interpretation. Keep the risk tied to missing criteria, not general anxiety.

  2. Compare clarification paths

    Consider a short outcome review, example-based criteria, a prototype check, or a bounded assumption. State what each path can establish and which role has authority to accept the result. Choose examples or a short review that can settle the highest-risk interpretation.

  3. Set the queue decision

    Choose clarification priority, owner, deadline or trigger, and a safe provisional boundary if work must continue. Record what evidence would change the decision or stop implementation. Record a safe provisional assumption only when its boundary and revisit point are explicit.

What to carry forward

The output is a priority decision based on guessing risk, clarification value, reversibility, and authority. Stop when the next clarification or provisional path is owned; do not let a deadline turn an untestable criterion into an implicit approval.

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