Visual Operations Usage Evidence — PR #201 Dogfood
Identification
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Evidence ID | visual-operations-usage-pr-201-dogfood |
| Date | 2026-06-15 |
| Recorder | Codex |
| Review or decision context | Post-merge dogfood closeout for the first checked-in Visual Operations usage evidence slice |
| Snapshot used | examples/visual-operations/github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md |
| Source refs | PR #201, merge commit e8488d5, CI run |
Usage boundary
- What was being reviewed: whether the first checked-in dogfood usage evidence record changed the activation posture for Visual Operations or simply added a second measurement point.
- Who used the snapshot: Codex, acting as maintainer/operator in the AletheIA development loop.
- Decision or question the snapshot supported: decide whether two consecutive dogfood closeouts now justify a collector, UI, backend, CI allowlist expansion, Adaptive Skills integration, or telemetry surface.
- Source refs: PR #201, merge commit
e8488d5, CI run27581612377, and the generated local snapshot files listed above.
Snapshot utility
| Question | Answer | Source refs |
|---|---|---|
| Which fields helped the review? | presentation_lane=closed, evidence_status=sufficient, explicit CI provenance, author-reported local validation, no alerts, no follow-up slices, and unavailable runtime/token/cost fields. |
github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md, PR #201 |
| Which fields were missing, misleading, stale, or too noisy? | human_review=unavailable remains the main repeated gap. Planning depth, readiness, skill, runtime, token, and cost signals remain unknown or unavailable as expected. |
github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md |
| Did the snapshot change a decision, shorten review, or only confirm known state? | It confirmed the slice closed cleanly and supported the decision that two consecutive dogfood records still do not activate new infrastructure. It also made the repeated human-review visibility gap easier to name. | PR #201, merge commit e8488d5 |
| Did the reviewer need to open the source PR, CI run, or evidence file anyway? | Yes. The snapshot was sufficient for orientation and decision framing, but source PR/CI records remained authoritative and were checked before recording the evidence. | PR #201, CI run 27581612377 |
Missing or unavailable signals
Record unknown or unavailable; do not infer values.
| Signal | Status | Why | Source refs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Planning depth | unknown | No governed planning-depth record was supplied. | github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md |
| Human review requirement | unknown | Authorization and merge occurred, but no separate durable review-requirement record was projected. | PR #201 |
| Runtime session | unavailable | No authoritative runtime-session export was attached. | github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md |
| Skill activation | unknown | No durable skill-activation record was supplied. | github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md |
| Tokens | unavailable | No provider or harness token telemetry was supplied. | github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md |
| Cost | unavailable | No governed cost record was supplied. | github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md |
Activation signal check
This record is not enough by itself to activate future infrastructure. Mark only what this usage actually supports.
| Possible future surface | Supported by this evidence? | Reason | Source refs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Add another checked-in snapshot to CI | no | The PR #201 snapshot is another closed successful PR and does not add a distinct projection scenario for the allowlist. | github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md, scripts/check-visual-ops-snapshots.sh |
| Improve projector field mapping | unclear | Two records now show human_review=unavailable; this is a candidate observation, but not enough to change mapping without a durable review source. |
github-pr-200-dogfood-output.md, github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md |
| Add GitHub collection/import | no | Manual assembly has happened twice but has not yet shown repeated material error or delay. | github-pr-201-dogfood-input.json |
| Add dashboard/UI | no | Markdown remained sufficient for the closeout decision. | github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md |
| Add persistence/backend | no | No cross-slice query need was demonstrated; two checked-in records are sufficient for current review. | This record |
| Add Adaptive Skills integration | no | No durable non-sensitive skill-activation record was used. | This record |
| Add runtime/token/cost telemetry | no | The useful behavior remains preserving unavailable telemetry rather than inventing values. | github-pr-201-dogfood-output.md |
Outcome
- Decision supported: keep Visual Operations in dogfood measurement mode. Two consecutive dogfood records support static snapshot utility for closeout, but still do not justify collector, UI, persistence/backend, Adaptive Skills integration, telemetry, or CI allowlist expansion.
- Follow-up Work Slice, if any: none yet. If a third real usage repeats the human-review visibility gap, consider a bounded mapping/review-source analysis before any infrastructure work.
- Stop condition or reason to keep phase closed: repeated successful closeout utility is useful but remains below activation thresholds for broader surfaces.
- Source refs: PR #201, merge commit
e8488d5, CI run27581612377, and generated snapshot files.
Privacy and restrictions
- Sensitive content withheld: no prompt, secret, private source body, or personal data beyond public GitHub actor labels was stored.
- Metadata-only references used: PR URL, commit URL, CI job URLs, file paths, and summarized local validation from the PR body.
- Hashes or authorized summaries: merge commit
e8488d5f1ab47c88b28562c290fbeafdd9bdb442and head SHA349a2931cb2648ba0634233a41efec8475d44925. - Source refs: PR #201, CI run
27581612377, generated JSON/Markdown snapshot files.