From ddce2009f678c4c0809245ef2041acfafe2445a9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chai Bot Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 17:45:29 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 1/6] ux-design: strengthen prototype reuse verification and coverage tracking Add existing-UI reuse preparation to the prototype direction gate: identify concrete source examples for affected navigation, scaffolding, tables, filters, actions, editors, and modals; classify each as reuse or intentional departure with rationale; present proposed organization before building; verify rendered result against source examples with explicit limits when source or browser is unavailable. Strengthen the User Stories Covered record to trace requirement/decision through screen/control and state/action to status with evidence. Require populating the planned mapping before generation, updating it before each researcher review and after each revision, and rechecking previous rows. Distinguish verified, mocked, partial, deferred, and missing statuses; surface incomplete core flows for existing human review rather than allowing silent completion claims or autonomous scope removal. Assisted-by: Chai Bot --- ux-design/SKILL.md | 2 +- ux-design/skills/prototype.md | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/ux-design/SKILL.md b/ux-design/SKILL.md index f7e0d77..972d2db 100644 --- a/ux-design/SKILL.md +++ b/ux-design/SKILL.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ --- name: ux-design -version: 0.3.0 +version: 0.4.0 description: >- UX design workflow that supports early research and exploratory prototyping from a Jira Feature or published PRD, then enriches the same context from its diff --git a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md index c845e17..1b53490 100644 --- a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md +++ b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md @@ -68,8 +68,13 @@ into the UX Design namespace. Using `01-discovery.md` and `02-research.md` when present, propose one or two design directions. For each, identify the user needs it prioritizes, the core interaction pattern, its tradeoffs, and how it compares with patterns from -discovery. Present the directions and wait for the researcher to choose or -suggest another. +discovery. When the feature modifies existing UI (workspace mode), also +prepare concrete source examples for affected areas — navigation, page +scaffolding, table/list layouts, filter controls, action menus, inline +editors, modal patterns as applicable. For each, record the source file +reference and classify as **reuse** (keep) or **depart** (change, with +rationale). Present the directions and this reuse organization together; +wait for the researcher to choose or suggest changes. Settle the create skill's onboarding answers with the researcher: @@ -141,6 +146,11 @@ Record the chosen strategy and rationale in `prototype-notes.md`. ### Step 2: Generate the Prototype +Before invoking the create skill, populate the **User Stories Covered** +table in `prototype-notes.md` with the planned mapping (status `planned` +for every row). Derive rows from discovery goals, PRD requirements, or +confirmed decisions; a linked `[UX]` story is not required. + When invoking the create skill with a workspace (local or Git URL), supply the expected discovery baseline SHA as task context alongside the source and flags — not as a CLI flag, but as an explicit constraint in the invocation @@ -304,6 +314,18 @@ complete prototype must have: served or opened, record the verification as **unverified** with the reason rather than claiming completion. Copied unchanged app scaffolding alone is not proof that the requested prototype content exists. +- **Source-conformance check (workspace mode):** Compare rendered result + against the source examples from Step 1. Confirm reused elements match + and departed elements have the intended change. When source or browser is + unavailable, record as limited — do not claim conformity. Justified + departures are expected; this is a focused check, not a whole-app audit. +- **Coverage update:** Update every **User Stories Covered** row against + the actual prototype: `verified` when rendered behavior matches, `mocked` + for stand-in data (mocks never imply production), `partial`, `deferred` + (with researcher approval), or `missing`. Recheck previous rows on each + revision — not only new edits. A missing or incomplete core flow must be + surfaced at the researcher's existing review gate; it cannot silently be + marked complete or removed from scope. Do not diagnose completion or failure from the presence or absence of a directory alone. Check for the actual agreed output artifacts. @@ -417,9 +439,12 @@ Do not invent research evidence. ## User Stories Covered -| Story | Acceptance Criteria | Status | -|-------|-------------------|--------| -| {story} | {criteria} | {covered / partial / deferred} | +| Requirement / Decision | Screen / Control | State / Action | Status | Evidence / Reason | +|------------------------|------------------|----------------|--------|-------------------| +| {source requirement or confirmed decision} | {screen or control} | {relevant state or action} | {planned / verified / mocked / partial / deferred / missing} | {evidence or reason} | + +{Populated before generation (Step 2) and updated before each review and +after each revision (Step 3). See Steps 2–3 for lifecycle rules.} ## Page Context From 0dd6ea3e11012148de3722e348bdf1cff02bb26a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chai Bot Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 19:27:11 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 2/6] ux-design: persist selected source example baseline in prototype notes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit After direction selection, save the chosen direction's source examples as a Source Example Baseline section in prototype-notes.md — the authoritative conformance record for the iteration. Step 3 source-conformance check now reads this saved baseline rather than generic Step 1 examples. Add compatible template section with Area/SourceReference/Classification/Rationale. Standalone mode records absence explicitly. Assisted-by: Chai Bot --- ux-design/skills/prototype.md | 25 +++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md index 1b53490..d048654 100644 --- a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md +++ b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md @@ -74,7 +74,11 @@ scaffolding, table/list layouts, filter controls, action menus, inline editors, modal patterns as applicable. For each, record the source file reference and classify as **reuse** (keep) or **depart** (change, with rationale). Present the directions and this reuse organization together; -wait for the researcher to choose or suggest changes. +wait for the researcher to choose or suggest changes. After selection, persist +that direction's examples in **Source Example Baseline** in +`prototype-notes.md` — conformance baseline for this iteration; preserve on +regeneration/refinement; update on human-approved direction change. +Standalone: "No source baseline — {reason}". Settle the create skill's onboarding answers with the researcher: @@ -314,11 +318,11 @@ complete prototype must have: served or opened, record the verification as **unverified** with the reason rather than claiming completion. Copied unchanged app scaffolding alone is not proof that the requested prototype content exists. -- **Source-conformance check (workspace mode):** Compare rendered result - against the source examples from Step 1. Confirm reused elements match - and departed elements have the intended change. When source or browser is - unavailable, record as limited — do not claim conformity. Justified - departures are expected; this is a focused check, not a whole-app audit. +- **Source-conformance check (workspace mode):** Read **Source Example + Baseline** from `prototype-notes.md` and compare rendered result against + it. Confirm reused elements match and departures are intended. When + source or browser unavailable, record as limited — do not claim + conformity. Justified departures expected; focused, not whole-app. - **Coverage update:** Update every **User Stories Covered** row against the actual prototype: `verified` when rendered behavior matches, `mocked` for stand-in data (mocks never imply production), `partial`, `deferred` @@ -437,6 +441,15 @@ Do not invent research evidence. |----------|-----------|-------------------| | {what} | {why} | {finding or researcher direction} | +## Source Example Baseline + +| Area | Source Reference | Classification | Rationale | +|------|-----------------|----------------|-----------| +| {area} | {path relative to frontend root} | {reuse / depart} | {why} | + +{From Step 1. Preserve on regeneration/refinement; update on human-approved +direction change. Standalone: "No source baseline — {reason}"} + ## User Stories Covered | Requirement / Decision | Screen / Control | State / Action | Status | Evidence / Reason | From 2b766b52402bbcf03a806e88096a333005eafa9a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chai Bot Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 20:08:06 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 3/6] ux-design: add conformance outcomes to source baseline and clarify coverage status MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Extend Source Example Baseline table with Outcome and Evidence columns. Step 3 compares rendered prototype against saved baseline; outcome starts unverified, then matched/mismatch/limited with evidence per entry. Approved departures can match; unavailable source/browser records limited with reason. Never inherit prior passes or silently rebaseline mismatches. Refresh each generation/revision; Step 4 preserves current results. Clarify coverage status: verified requires browser-observed match without stand-in data/interactions. Otherwise-complete flows using stand-ins are mocked even if behavior matches — record checks and mock limits in Evidence (no production claim). Partial/deferred/missing for gaps and scope with mock limits disclosed. Surface core gaps at existing review gate; never silently claim completion or drop scope. Restore source requirement or confirmed decision traceability in template. Assisted-by: Chai Bot --- ux-design/skills/prototype.md | 44 +++++++++++++++++------------------ 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) diff --git a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md index d048654..f0131fa 100644 --- a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md +++ b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md @@ -76,8 +76,8 @@ reference and classify as **reuse** (keep) or **depart** (change, with rationale). Present the directions and this reuse organization together; wait for the researcher to choose or suggest changes. After selection, persist that direction's examples in **Source Example Baseline** in -`prototype-notes.md` — conformance baseline for this iteration; preserve on -regeneration/refinement; update on human-approved direction change. +`prototype-notes.md` — conformance baseline; preserve on regen/refinement, +update on human-approved direction change. Standalone: "No source baseline — {reason}". Settle the create skill's onboarding answers with the researcher: @@ -318,18 +318,19 @@ complete prototype must have: served or opened, record the verification as **unverified** with the reason rather than claiming completion. Copied unchanged app scaffolding alone is not proof that the requested prototype content exists. -- **Source-conformance check (workspace mode):** Read **Source Example - Baseline** from `prototype-notes.md` and compare rendered result against - it. Confirm reused elements match and departures are intended. When - source or browser unavailable, record as limited — do not claim - conformity. Justified departures expected; focused, not whole-app. -- **Coverage update:** Update every **User Stories Covered** row against - the actual prototype: `verified` when rendered behavior matches, `mocked` - for stand-in data (mocks never imply production), `partial`, `deferred` - (with researcher approval), or `missing`. Recheck previous rows on each - revision — not only new edits. A missing or incomplete core flow must be - surfaced at the researcher's existing review gate; it cannot silently be - marked complete or removed from scope. +- **Source-conformance check (workspace mode):** Compare rendered prototype + against saved **Source Example Baseline** in `prototype-notes.md`; outcome + starts `unverified`, write `matched`/`mismatch`/`limited` + Evidence per + entry. Approved departures can match; unavailable → `limited`+reason. + Never inherit passes or silently rebaseline mismatches; refresh each + generation/revision. Step 4 preserves results. +- **Coverage update:** Update every **User Stories Covered** row. `verified` + requires browser-observed match without stand-in data/interactions. + Otherwise-complete flows using stand-ins are `mocked` even if behavior + matches — record checks+limits in Evidence (no production claim); + `partial`/`deferred`(researcher-approved)/`missing` for gaps/scope + (disclose mocks too). Surface core gaps at existing gate; never silently + complete or drop scope; recheck previous rows each revision. Do not diagnose completion or failure from the presence or absence of a directory alone. Check for the actual agreed output artifacts. @@ -443,21 +444,20 @@ Do not invent research evidence. ## Source Example Baseline -| Area | Source Reference | Classification | Rationale | -|------|-----------------|----------------|-----------| -| {area} | {path relative to frontend root} | {reuse / depart} | {why} | +| Area | Source Reference | Classification | Rationale | Outcome | Evidence | +|------|-----------------|----------------|-----------|---------|----------| +| {area} | {frontend-relative path} | {reuse/depart} | {why} | {unverified/matched/mismatch/limited} | {observation or reason} | -{From Step 1. Preserve on regeneration/refinement; update on human-approved -direction change. Standalone: "No source baseline — {reason}"} +{Metadata: Step 1, preserve on regen/refinement. Outcome/Evidence: Step 3. +Standalone: "No source baseline"} ## User Stories Covered | Requirement / Decision | Screen / Control | State / Action | Status | Evidence / Reason | |------------------------|------------------|----------------|--------|-------------------| -| {source requirement or confirmed decision} | {screen or control} | {relevant state or action} | {planned / verified / mocked / partial / deferred / missing} | {evidence or reason} | +| {source requirement or confirmed decision} | {screen/control} | {state/action} | {planned/verified/mocked/partial/deferred/missing} | {evidence, mock limits, or reason} | -{Populated before generation (Step 2) and updated before each review and -after each revision (Step 3). See Steps 2–3 for lifecycle rules.} +{See Steps 2–3 for lifecycle.} ## Page Context From 4d695a39df1cd023eaed9092ced42f204ea2e458 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chai Bot Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 20:36:25 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 4/6] ux-design: define expected treatment for approved departures in source baseline Add Expected Treatment column to Source Example Baseline table. For depart rows, record the approved rendered change alongside rationale; for reuse, reference unchanged source. Step 3 checks reuse against source and departures against saved expected treatment; unavailable treatment records limited with reason. Expected treatment is part of selected metadata, preserved on regeneration/refinement and updated only on human-approved direction change. Assisted-by: Chai Bot --- ux-design/skills/prototype.md | 28 +++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md index f0131fa..55ab94a 100644 --- a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md +++ b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md @@ -69,11 +69,10 @@ Using `01-discovery.md` and `02-research.md` when present, propose one or two design directions. For each, identify the user needs it prioritizes, the core interaction pattern, its tradeoffs, and how it compares with patterns from discovery. When the feature modifies existing UI (workspace mode), also -prepare concrete source examples for affected areas — navigation, page -scaffolding, table/list layouts, filter controls, action menus, inline -editors, modal patterns as applicable. For each, record the source file -reference and classify as **reuse** (keep) or **depart** (change, with -rationale). Present the directions and this reuse organization together; +prepare concrete source examples for affected areas — navigation, scaffolding, +tables/lists, filters, actions, editors, modals as applicable. For each, +record the source file reference and classify as **reuse** (keep) or +**depart** (change — record rationale+expected treatment). Present both; wait for the researcher to choose or suggest changes. After selection, persist that direction's examples in **Source Example Baseline** in `prototype-notes.md` — conformance baseline; preserve on regen/refinement, @@ -319,11 +318,11 @@ complete prototype must have: reason rather than claiming completion. Copied unchanged app scaffolding alone is not proof that the requested prototype content exists. - **Source-conformance check (workspace mode):** Compare rendered prototype - against saved **Source Example Baseline** in `prototype-notes.md`; outcome - starts `unverified`, write `matched`/`mismatch`/`limited` + Evidence per - entry. Approved departures can match; unavailable → `limited`+reason. - Never inherit passes or silently rebaseline mismatches; refresh each - generation/revision. Step 4 preserves results. + against saved **Source Example Baseline** in `prototype-notes.md`; starts + `unverified`, write `matched`/`mismatch`/`limited` + Evidence per + entry. Reuse: check against source; depart: against saved expected + treatment; unavailable → `limited`+reason; never inherit passes or + silently rebaseline; refresh each gen/revision. Step 4 preserves. - **Coverage update:** Update every **User Stories Covered** row. `verified` requires browser-observed match without stand-in data/interactions. Otherwise-complete flows using stand-ins are `mocked` even if behavior @@ -444,12 +443,11 @@ Do not invent research evidence. ## Source Example Baseline -| Area | Source Reference | Classification | Rationale | Outcome | Evidence | -|------|-----------------|----------------|-----------|---------|----------| -| {area} | {frontend-relative path} | {reuse/depart} | {why} | {unverified/matched/mismatch/limited} | {observation or reason} | +| Area | Source Reference | Classification | Rationale | Expected Treatment | Outcome | Evidence | +|------|-----------------|----------------|-----------|-------------------|---------|----------| +| {area} | {frontend-relative path} | {reuse/depart} | {why} | {unchanged/approved change} | {unverified/matched/mismatch/limited} | {observation or reason} | -{Metadata: Step 1, preserve on regen/refinement. Outcome/Evidence: Step 3. -Standalone: "No source baseline"} +{Step 1 metadata+treatment; Step 3 outcome/evidence. Standalone: no baseline} ## User Stories Covered From 0ad2958de7ed9a61edd8065ecfca86b7c833a2af Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chai Bot Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 20:55:31 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 5/6] ux-design: guard source-conformance check against absent or empty baseline MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Before per-entry source-conformance iteration, verify the Source Example Baseline exists and contains selected entries. If absent or empty, stop and restore at the existing Step 1 direction gate — do not invent entries, treat empty as passed, or silently skip the check. Standalone mode remains exempt with its existing no-baseline record. Valid baselines with individually unavailable evidence continue to use existing limited+reason rules without hard-stopping. Assisted-by: Chai Bot --- ux-design/skills/prototype.md | 33 +++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md index 55ab94a..a76b29e 100644 --- a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md +++ b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md @@ -70,13 +70,12 @@ design directions. For each, identify the user needs it prioritizes, the core interaction pattern, its tradeoffs, and how it compares with patterns from discovery. When the feature modifies existing UI (workspace mode), also prepare concrete source examples for affected areas — navigation, scaffolding, -tables/lists, filters, actions, editors, modals as applicable. For each, -record the source file reference and classify as **reuse** (keep) or -**depart** (change — record rationale+expected treatment). Present both; -wait for the researcher to choose or suggest changes. After selection, persist -that direction's examples in **Source Example Baseline** in -`prototype-notes.md` — conformance baseline; preserve on regen/refinement, -update on human-approved direction change. +tables/lists, filters, actions, editors, modals as applicable. Record source +reference, classify **reuse** or **depart** (record rationale+expected +treatment). Present both; researcher chooses or suggests. +After selection, persist that direction's examples in **Source Example +Baseline** in `prototype-notes.md`; preserve on regen/refinement; update on +human-approved direction change. Standalone: "No source baseline — {reason}". Settle the create skill's onboarding answers with the researcher: @@ -317,19 +316,21 @@ complete prototype must have: served or opened, record the verification as **unverified** with the reason rather than claiming completion. Copied unchanged app scaffolding alone is not proof that the requested prototype content exists. -- **Source-conformance check (workspace mode):** Compare rendered prototype - against saved **Source Example Baseline** in `prototype-notes.md`; starts - `unverified`, write `matched`/`mismatch`/`limited` + Evidence per - entry. Reuse: check against source; depart: against saved expected - treatment; unavailable → `limited`+reason; never inherit passes or - silently rebaseline; refresh each gen/revision. Step 4 preserves. +- **Source-conformance check (workspace mode):** Read **Source Example + Baseline** from `prototype-notes.md`. If absent or empty (no selected + entries), stop — restore at Step 1 gate; do not invent entries or treat + empty as passed. Compare rendered prototype against saved record; outcome + starts `unverified`; per entry: reuse vs source, depart vs saved expected + treatment; write `matched`/`mismatch`/`limited`+Evidence; unavailable + → `limited`+reason; never inherit passes or silently rebaseline; refresh + each gen/revision. Step 4 preserves. - **Coverage update:** Update every **User Stories Covered** row. `verified` requires browser-observed match without stand-in data/interactions. Otherwise-complete flows using stand-ins are `mocked` even if behavior matches — record checks+limits in Evidence (no production claim); `partial`/`deferred`(researcher-approved)/`missing` for gaps/scope - (disclose mocks too). Surface core gaps at existing gate; never silently - complete or drop scope; recheck previous rows each revision. + (disclose mocks). Surface core gaps at existing gate; never silently + complete/drop scope. Recheck previous rows each revision. Do not diagnose completion or failure from the presence or absence of a directory alone. Check for the actual agreed output artifacts. @@ -455,7 +456,7 @@ Do not invent research evidence. |------------------------|------------------|----------------|--------|-------------------| | {source requirement or confirmed decision} | {screen/control} | {state/action} | {planned/verified/mocked/partial/deferred/missing} | {evidence, mock limits, or reason} | -{See Steps 2–3 for lifecycle.} +{Steps 2–3.} ## Page Context From 39a1533a2cb62ebade59fe6248a8d3954dab602e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chai Bot Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 21:29:48 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 6/6] ux-design: require concrete coverage rows before generation and verification MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Before generation, require at least one concrete planned User Stories Covered row grounded in discovery goals, PRD requirements, or confirmed decisions — header-only, blank, or template-only rows do not qualify. Before coverage verification, recheck that concrete rows exist; if empty, return to Step 2 planning rather than vacuously passing or claiming coverage. Standalone source-baseline exemption and valid limited rows remain unaffected. Assisted-by: Chai Bot --- ux-design/skills/prototype.md | 35 +++++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md index a76b29e..e9729ee 100644 --- a/ux-design/skills/prototype.md +++ b/ux-design/skills/prototype.md @@ -73,9 +73,9 @@ prepare concrete source examples for affected areas — navigation, scaffolding, tables/lists, filters, actions, editors, modals as applicable. Record source reference, classify **reuse** or **depart** (record rationale+expected treatment). Present both; researcher chooses or suggests. -After selection, persist that direction's examples in **Source Example -Baseline** in `prototype-notes.md`; preserve on regen/refinement; update on -human-approved direction change. +After selection, persist that direction's +examples in **Source Example Baseline** in `prototype-notes.md`; preserve on +regen/refinement; update on human-approved direction change. Standalone: "No source baseline — {reason}". Settle the create skill's onboarding answers with the researcher: @@ -148,10 +148,11 @@ Record the chosen strategy and rationale in `prototype-notes.md`. ### Step 2: Generate the Prototype -Before invoking the create skill, populate the **User Stories Covered** -table in `prototype-notes.md` with the planned mapping (status `planned` -for every row). Derive rows from discovery goals, PRD requirements, or -confirmed decisions; a linked `[UX]` story is not required. +Before invoking the create skill, populate **User Stories Covered** in +`prototype-notes.md` with planned rows from discovery goals, PRD +requirements, or confirmed decisions; a linked `[UX]` story is not required. +At least one concrete row required — header/blank/template-only do not +qualify; if none, derive from inputs or ask researcher. When invoking the create skill with a workspace (local or Git URL), supply the expected discovery baseline SHA as task context alongside the source and @@ -318,13 +319,15 @@ complete prototype must have: alone is not proof that the requested prototype content exists. - **Source-conformance check (workspace mode):** Read **Source Example Baseline** from `prototype-notes.md`. If absent or empty (no selected - entries), stop — restore at Step 1 gate; do not invent entries or treat - empty as passed. Compare rendered prototype against saved record; outcome - starts `unverified`; per entry: reuse vs source, depart vs saved expected - treatment; write `matched`/`mismatch`/`limited`+Evidence; unavailable - → `limited`+reason; never inherit passes or silently rebaseline; refresh - each gen/revision. Step 4 preserves. -- **Coverage update:** Update every **User Stories Covered** row. `verified` + entries), stop — restore at Step 1 gate; do not invent entries or pass empty. + Compare rendered prototype against saved record; starts `unverified`; + per entry: reuse vs source, depart vs saved expected treatment; write + `matched`/`mismatch`/`limited`+Evidence; unavailable → `limited`+reason; + never inherit passes or silently rebaseline; refresh each gen/revision; + Step 4 preserves. +- **Coverage update:** If **User Stories Covered** has no concrete rows, + stop — return to Step 2 to restore rows then rerun verification; + update every row. `verified` requires browser-observed match without stand-in data/interactions. Otherwise-complete flows using stand-ins are `mocked` even if behavior matches — record checks+limits in Evidence (no production claim); @@ -445,7 +448,7 @@ Do not invent research evidence. ## Source Example Baseline | Area | Source Reference | Classification | Rationale | Expected Treatment | Outcome | Evidence | -|------|-----------------|----------------|-----------|-------------------|---------|----------| +|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | {area} | {frontend-relative path} | {reuse/depart} | {why} | {unchanged/approved change} | {unverified/matched/mismatch/limited} | {observation or reason} | {Step 1 metadata+treatment; Step 3 outcome/evidence. Standalone: no baseline} @@ -453,7 +456,7 @@ Do not invent research evidence. ## User Stories Covered | Requirement / Decision | Screen / Control | State / Action | Status | Evidence / Reason | -|------------------------|------------------|----------------|--------|-------------------| +|---|---|---|---|---| | {source requirement or confirmed decision} | {screen/control} | {state/action} | {planned/verified/mocked/partial/deferred/missing} | {evidence, mock limits, or reason} | {Steps 2–3.}