TenantAtlas/specs/358-operationrun-queue-truth-foundation/spec.md

# Feature Specification: OperationRun Queue Truth Foundation

**Feature Branch**: `358-operationrun-queue-truth-foundation`  
**Created**: 2026-06-06  
**Status**: Draft  
**Input**: User-provided OperationRun queue-truth draft, reconciled against current repo truth

## Spec Candidate Check *(mandatory — SPEC-GATE-001)*

- **Problem**: Current `OperationRun` UX still allows contradictory generic queue truth. The repo can show stale-attention semantics and ordinary queue/progress reassurance for the same active run, depending on which helper or surface renders first.
- **Today's failure**: A run can surface `Likely stale` lifecycle attention while generic copy still says `Waiting for worker.` or `No action needed yet. The operation is waiting for a worker.` This creates a false-calm operator message on active monitoring surfaces.
- **User-visible improvement**: Queued and running `OperationRun` records will render one honest generic lifecycle story across shell hints, monitoring rows, and canonical detail without overclaiming domain success or orphaned queue state.
- **Smallest enterprise-capable version**: Align the existing generic lifecycle helpers (`OperationRunFreshnessState`, `OperationRunProgressContract`, `RunDurationInsights`, and `OperationUxPresenter`) and apply the resulting truth to current monitoring and shell surfaces only.
- **Explicit non-goals**: No new persisted `OperationRun` statuses or outcomes, no queue schema redesign, no new worker-health subsystem, no new notification family, no new adapter framework, no new domain-success reconciliation, no restore/review/backup auto-completion logic, and no destructive action changes.
- **Permanent complexity imported**: One bounded derived queue-truth path over existing `OperationRun` state, plus focused tests that lock the contract across shared monitoring surfaces.
- **Why now**: Historical specs already improved stale visibility and shared progress, but current repo truth still contains contradictory generic wording. This is an active operator-trust gap in currently shipped runtime paths.
- **Why not local**: Fixing only one Blade view, one banner, or one detail card would leave the contradiction between progress, freshness, and queue-guidance helpers intact.
- **Approval class**: Core Enterprise
- **Red flags triggered**: shared interaction family, monitoring-state semantics, and possible helper consolidation. Defense: the slice remains derived-only, persistence-free, and narrower than a new reconciliation framework.
- **Score**: Nutzen: 2 | Dringlichkeit: 2 | Scope: 2 | Komplexität: 1 | Produktnähe: 2 | Wiederverwendung: 2 | **Gesamt: 11/12**
- **Decision**: approve

## Repo Truth Reconciliation

The user draft is directionally correct, but current repo truth changes the exact framing:

1. The repo helper advanced to `1000` because `specs/999-seeder-external-id/` already exists, but this package is intentionally finalized as user-requested Spec `358`.
2. Generic stale reconciliation already exists via `TenantpilotReconcileOperationRuns` and `OperationLifecycleReconciler`; adapter-backed reconciliation already exists via `OpsReconcileAdapterRuns` and `AdapterRunReconciler`.
3. A shared progress helper already exists via `OperationRunProgressContract`, and Spec 272 already extended its active-progress precedence for phased/composite truth; this spec aligns stale/fresh queue guidance with that current shared contract instead of inventing a new one.
4. The current canonical Monitoring routes are workspace-scoped: `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations` and `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations/{run}`. `OperationRunResource` remains an implementation seam, not a route-backed surface.
5. No follow-up `Spec 359` promise is recorded here. Any later adapter or domain-success work must be promoted from fresh repo truth rather than pre-allocating a speculative framework sequence.

## Spec Scope Fields *(mandatory)*

- **Scope**: workspace, tenant, canonical-view
- **Primary Routes**:
  - workspace-admin surfaces that host the shared shell activity hint while an entitled managed environment is active, including current `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/environments/{environment}/...` starts
  - `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations`
  - `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations/{run}`
  - the current canonical Monitoring surfaces `App\Filament\Pages\Monitoring\Operations` and `App\Filament\Pages\Operations\TenantlessOperationRunViewer`
- **Data Ownership**:
  - `operation_runs` remain the only lifecycle and freshness source of truth
  - `OperationRun` context remains the only place where legitimacy or reconciliation evidence may already exist
  - no new persisted queue-truth mirror, no new audit artifact, and no new worker-health record are introduced
- **RBAC**:
  - existing workspace and managed-environment entitlement rules remain authoritative
  - non-members and out-of-scope actors remain `404`
  - this spec changes wording and derived presentation only; it does not widen access or add new capability strings

For canonical-view specs, the spec MUST define:

- **Default filter behavior when tenant-context is active**: Existing environment-prefilter and page-state behavior on `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations` remain unchanged. This spec changes queue truth, not monitoring state ownership.
- **Explicit entitlement checks preventing cross-tenant leakage**: Derived stale/queued guidance must use only runs the actor is already authorized to view. No new wording may reveal hidden tenant scope or hidden run existence.

## UI Surface Impact *(mandatory — UI-COV-001)*

- [ ] No UI surface impact
- [x] Existing page changed
- [ ] New page/route added
- [ ] Navigation changed
- [ ] Filament panel/provider surface changed
- [ ] New modal/drawer/wizard/action added
- [ ] New table/form/state added
- [ ] Customer-facing surface changed
- [ ] Dangerous action changed
- [x] Status/evidence/review presentation changed
- [x] Workspace/environment context presentation changed

## UI/Productization Coverage *(mandatory when UI Surface Impact is not "No UI surface impact")*

- **Route/page/surface**:
  - tenant shell activity hint (`BulkOperationProgress`)
  - workspace operations hub (`App\Filament\Pages\Monitoring\Operations`) at `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations`
  - canonical operation detail (`App\Filament\Pages\Operations\TenantlessOperationRunViewer`) at `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations/{run}`
  - shared implementation seam only: `App\Filament\Resources\OperationRunResource` for the reused table/detail payload contract
- **Current or new page archetype**: existing monitoring/workbench family only
- **Design depth**: Domain Pattern Surface
- **Repo-truth level**: repo-verified
- **Existing pattern reused**: current `OperationRun` monitoring family, current shell activity hint, current monitoring detail banners
- **New pattern required**: none; this is a truth-alignment follow-up within the existing pattern family
- **Screenshot required**: no; the slice corrects shared wording/derived truth inside existing monitoring surfaces
- **Page audit required**: no new page-report identity; existing monitoring family coverage is sufficient
- **Customer-safe review required**: no; operator-only monitoring surfaces
- **Dangerous-action review required**: no; no action hierarchy or destructive behavior changes
- **Coverage files updated or explicitly not needed**: no new coverage file is required because the existing monitoring-family anchors already cover the touched reachable surfaces: `docs/ui-ux-enterprise-audit/route-inventory.md` (`UI-016`, `UI-017`), `docs/ui-ux-enterprise-audit/page-reports/ui-003-operations.md`, `docs/ui-ux-enterprise-audit/strategic-surfaces.md`, and `specs/313-workspace-environment-context-browser-verification/surface-inventory.md`
- **No-impact rationale when applicable**: N/A

## Cross-Cutting / Shared Pattern Reuse *(mandatory)*

- **Cross-cutting feature?**: yes
- **Interaction class(es)**: status messaging, queue/progress guidance, monitoring detail guidance, shell active-work hint
- **Systems touched**:
  - `OperationRunFreshnessState`
  - `OperationRunProgressContract`
  - `RunDurationInsights`
  - `OperationUxPresenter`
  - current shell banner and canonical monitoring/detail surfaces
- **Existing pattern(s) to extend**: current lifecycle policy, freshness derivation, the Spec-270/272 shared progress contract, monitoring detail banner, and shared run-link/presenter paths
- **Shared contract / presenter / builder / renderer to reuse**: `OperationRunProgressContract`, `OperationUxPresenter`, `OperationRunFreshnessState`, and current monitoring/view renderer paths
- **Why the existing shared path is sufficient or insufficient**: The repo already has the right ownership boundaries, but the generic queue truth is split across multiple helpers that can disagree in wording and emphasis.
- **Allowed deviation and why**: none by default; if one tiny helper is required to keep existing presenters reviewable, it must remain local to current Ops UX truth and must not become an adapter registry
- **Consistency impact**: queued/running/stale wording, progress availability, lifecycle attention, and detail guidance must remain aligned across shell, list, and canonical detail
- **Review focus**: no surface may reassure with ordinary queue copy after freshness has already escalated the same active run to stale attention

## OperationRun UX Impact *(mandatory)*

- **Touches OperationRun start/completion/link UX?**: yes, reuse-only
- **Shared OperationRun UX contract/layer reused**: current `OperationRun` link, freshness, presenter, and progress helper paths
- **Delegated start/completion UX behaviors**: existing queued toasts, canonical run links, browser events, and terminal notification paths remain unchanged
- **Local surface-owned behavior that remains**: density and placement only
- **Queued DB-notification policy**: unchanged
- **Terminal notification path**: unchanged central lifecycle mechanism
- **Exception required?**: none

## Provider Boundary / Platform Core Check *(mandatory)*

- **Shared provider/platform boundary touched?**: no
- **Boundary classification**: N/A
- **Seams affected**: N/A
- **Neutral platform terms preserved or introduced**: `operation`, `queued`, `running`, `lifecycle window`, `review worker health`
- **Provider-specific semantics retained and why**: none
- **Why this does not deepen provider coupling accidentally**: the slice works entirely on platform-owned `OperationRun` truth and existing shared monitoring helpers
- **Follow-up path**: none

## UI / Surface Guardrail Impact *(mandatory)*

| Surface / Change | Operator-facing surface change? | Native vs Custom | Shared-Family Relevance | State Layers Touched | Exception Needed? | Low-Impact / `N/A` Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tenant shell activity hint | yes | Native Filament + existing Livewire view | shared active-work hint family | shell, page | no | no new action or route |
| Operations list / resource detail summary | yes | Native Filament resource/detail | shared monitoring family | page, detail | no | wording-only inside existing collection/detail |
| Canonical tenantless run viewer banners | yes | Native Filament page | shared monitoring detail family | detail | no | no new diagnostics section family |

## Decision-First Surface Role *(mandatory)*

| Surface | Decision Role | Human-in-the-loop Moment | Immediately Visible for First Decision | On-Demand Detail / Evidence | Why This Is Primary or Why Not | Workflow Alignment | Attention-load Reduction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tenant shell activity hint | Secondary Context Surface | Decide whether an active run needs inspection now | active-state truth, one open link, honest progress availability | full diagnostics stay on canonical monitoring/detail pages | secondary because it supports ongoing work rather than owning diagnostics | follows existing start-surface workflow | removes false calmness |
| Operations list | Primary Decision Surface | Decide which active run needs inspection first | lifecycle attention, queue truth, scope, and run identity | full detail after drill-through | primary because it is the canonical monitoring queue | aligns with current monitoring triage | removes open-every-row guesswork |
| Canonical run detail | Tertiary Evidence / Diagnostics Surface | Confirm what the stale or active state really means | one honest lifecycle explanation before deep diagnostics | raw context, history, evidence, and related links | tertiary because inspection already happened | preserves current detail role | removes banner/guidance contradiction |

## Audience-Aware Disclosure *(mandatory)*

| Surface | Audience Modes In Scope | Decision-First Default-Visible Content | Operator Diagnostics | Support / Raw Evidence | One Dominant Next Action | Hidden / Gated By Default | Duplicate-Truth Prevention |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tenant shell activity hint | operator-MSP | active-state summary plus one open action | minimal guidance only | raw/support data stays off-surface | `View operation` or current collective review action | raw detail stays on canonical monitoring surfaces | do not repeat stale explanation multiple ways |
| Operations list | operator-MSP | row-level stale/queued truth and scope | detail remains secondary | raw payloads stay on detail | row open | raw and related evidence stay on detail | one row summary, not multiple competing summaries |
| Canonical run detail | operator-MSP, support-platform | one honest lifecycle banner | diagnostics sections below the banner | raw context remains lower-priority | existing return/open actions | support/raw detail remains secondary to the top summary | lifecycle banner and queue guidance must not disagree |

## UI/UX Surface Classification *(mandatory)*

| Surface | Action Surface Class | Surface Type | Likely Next Operator Action | Primary Inspect/Open Model | Row Click | Secondary Actions Placement | Destructive Actions Placement | Canonical Collection Route | Canonical Detail Route | Scope Signals | Canonical Noun | Critical Truth Visible by Default | Exception Type / Justification |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tenant shell activity hint | Monitoring hint | Activity shell hint | Open the active run if guidance escalates | explicit open link | forbidden | existing shell secondary actions only | none | `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations` with current contextual prefilter rules | `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations/{run}` | current tenant/workspace shell context | Operation | whether the run is ordinary active work or already stale | none |
| Operations list | List / Table / Monitoring | Read-only monitoring registry | Open the run that needs follow-up | full-row open | required | existing table controls only | none | `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations` | `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations/{run}` | workspace scope and current filters | Operation run | honest queued/running lifecycle truth | none |
| Canonical run detail | Record / Detail / Monitoring | Diagnostics-first detail surface | Inspect lifecycle truth before deeper diagnosis | canonical detail page | N/A | existing header/related links only | none | `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations` | `/admin/workspaces/{workspace}/operations/{run}` | workspace scope plus entitled tenant context | Operation run | honest active-state explanation | none |

## Operator Surface Contract *(mandatory)*

| Surface | Primary Persona | Decision / Operator Action Supported | Surface Type | Primary Operator Question | Default-visible Information | Diagnostics-only Information | Status Dimensions Used | Mutation Scope | Primary Actions | Dangerous Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tenant shell activity hint | tenant operator | Decide whether to inspect active work now | shell hint | Is this active work still ordinary, or is it already stale? | label, status, progress availability, open link | deep diagnostics remain elsewhere | lifecycle, freshness, progress availability | none | current open/review action | none |
| Operations list | workspace operator | Prioritize which active run to inspect | monitoring registry | Which run is actually waiting, progressing, or already stale? | row summary, scope, lifecycle attention | raw payloads on detail | lifecycle, freshness, queue truth | none | open row | none |
| Canonical run detail | workspace operator | Confirm generic lifecycle truth before diagnosing | detail surface | Why does this run read as stale or still-active? | one lifecycle banner and queue guidance | raw context, failure payloads, related artifacts | lifecycle, freshness, legitimacy evidence | none | existing navigation and related links | none |

## Proportionality Review *(mandatory when structural complexity is introduced)*

- **New source of truth?**: no
- **New persisted entity/table/artifact?**: no
- **New abstraction?**: no by default; prefer extending existing helpers
- **New enum/state/reason family?**: no
- **New cross-domain UI framework/taxonomy?**: no
- **Current operator problem**: current generic queue truth can contradict itself across existing shared monitoring surfaces
- **Existing structure is insufficient because**: lifecycle, freshness, progress, and queue guidance currently live in separate helpers that can drift in wording and emphasis
- **Narrowest correct implementation**: align existing shared helpers and current monitoring renderers without adding a new framework, status family, or persistence layer
- **Ownership cost**: bounded shared-helper review burden plus focused tests
- **Alternative intentionally rejected**: a new reconciliation framework or queue-health persistence layer was rejected because the current issue is derived wording drift, not missing stored truth
- **Release truth**: current-release operator-trust correction

## Testing / Lane / Runtime Impact *(mandatory for runtime behavior changes)*

- **Test purpose / classification**: Unit + Feature
- **Validation lane(s)**: fast-feedback, confidence
- **Why this classification and these lanes are sufficient**: the feature changes derived queue truth and current rendered monitoring output; focused unit and feature proof are sufficient without a new browser or heavy-governance lane
- **New or expanded test families**:
  - `apps/platform/tests/Unit/Support/OpsUx/OperationRunProgressContractTest.php`
  - `apps/platform/tests/Unit/Support/OpsUx/RunDurationInsightsTest.php` or adjacent focused unit coverage if the repo keeps these assertions in an existing file
  - `apps/platform/tests/Feature/OpsUx/ActivityFeedbackSurfaceTest.php`
  - `apps/platform/tests/Feature/OpsUx/BulkOperationProgressDbOnlyTest.php`
  - `apps/platform/tests/Feature/MonitoringOperationsTest.php`
  - `apps/platform/tests/Feature/Monitoring/OperationLifecycleFreshnessPresentationTest.php`
  - `apps/platform/tests/Feature/Monitoring/MonitoringOperationsTest.php`
  - `apps/platform/tests/Feature/Filament/OperationRunEnterpriseDetailPageTest.php`
  - `apps/platform/tests/Feature/Operations/TenantlessOperationRunViewerTest.php`
- **Fixture / helper cost impact**: low to moderate; reuse existing `OperationRun` factories, workspace membership helpers, and monitoring fixtures only
- **Heavy-family visibility / justification**: none
- **Special surface test profile**: monitoring-state-page plus shared-detail-family
- **Standard-native relief or required special coverage**: feature coverage is sufficient; no browser smoke is required unless implementation later proves a render-only regression that unit/feature coverage cannot catch
- **Reviewer handoff**: reviewers must confirm the same stale run no longer mixes stale attention with ordinary queue/progress reassurance on shell, list, and detail surfaces
- **Budget / baseline / trend impact**: none expected beyond small feature-local coverage growth
- **Escalation needed**: `reject-or-split` if the slice expands into new persistence, adapter orchestration, or queue runtime redesign
- **Active feature PR close-out entry**: Guardrail / Smoke Coverage
- **Planned validation commands**:
  - `cd apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail artisan test --compact tests/Unit/Support/OpsUx/OperationRunProgressContractTest.php`
  - `cd apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail artisan test --compact tests/Feature/OpsUx/ActivityFeedbackSurfaceTest.php tests/Feature/OpsUx/BulkOperationProgressDbOnlyTest.php tests/Feature/MonitoringOperationsTest.php tests/Feature/Monitoring/OperationLifecycleFreshnessPresentationTest.php tests/Feature/Monitoring/MonitoringOperationsTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/OperationRunEnterpriseDetailPageTest.php tests/Feature/Operations/TenantlessOperationRunViewerTest.php`
  - `git diff --check`

## User Scenarios & Testing *(mandatory)*

### User Story 1 - See honest queued and stale truth on active monitoring surfaces (Priority: P1)

As an operator, I need active monitoring surfaces to distinguish normal queued/running work from stale lifecycle drift without mixing calm queue reassurance into the same state.

**Why this priority**: This is the direct trust gap visible in current runtime surfaces.

**Independent Test**: Seed fresh and stale queued/running runs, open the shell activity hint and monitoring list, and verify that stale-active runs do not mix stale attention with ordinary queue or progress reassurance.

**Acceptance Scenarios**:

1. **Given** a queued or running run is past its lifecycle window, **When** the shell or monitoring list renders it, **Then** the visible stale-active state does not also reassure with ordinary `Waiting for worker.`, `Progress details pending.`, or equivalent calm queue/progress copy.
2. **Given** a fresh queued or running run is still within its lifecycle window, **When** the same surfaces render it, **Then** the copy remains calm and does not falsely escalate it as stale.

### User Story 2 - Keep canonical run detail aligned with generic queue truth (Priority: P1)

As an operator, I need canonical run detail to confirm the same generic lifecycle meaning that list and shell surfaces already communicate before I inspect deeper diagnostics.

**Why this priority**: The current contradiction is most damaging when detail and compact surfaces disagree.

**Independent Test**: Open canonical detail for fresh, stale, and reconciled runs and verify that lifecycle banners, queue guidance, and top summary agree with the generic monitoring truth.

**Acceptance Scenarios**:

1. **Given** a stale queued or stale running run, **When** the detail page opens, **Then** the top summary explains that the run is past its lifecycle window before deeper diagnostics render.
2. **Given** a reconciled terminal run, **When** the detail page opens, **Then** it preserves the existing reconciled truth and does not regress to ordinary active-work guidance.

### User Story 3 - Keep proof-backed reconciliation separate from generic queue truth (Priority: P2)

As a product owner, I need generic queue truth to stay separate from domain-success or adapter reconciliation so that stale monitoring copy does not silently become a business-completion engine.

**Why this priority**: The slice must stay narrow and avoid speculative framework growth.

**Independent Test**: Compare a stale generic run and an adapter-reconciled run, then verify that generic stale wording remains cautious while existing reconciled evidence paths still drive terminal truth where already implemented.

**Acceptance Scenarios**:

1. **Given** a stale active run without proof-backed queue legitimacy evidence, **When** the UI renders it, **Then** the wording stays at `past lifecycle window` or equivalent cautious language and does not claim orphaned or domain-complete truth.
2. **Given** a run already completed through scheduled or adapter reconciliation, **When** the UI renders it, **Then** the existing reconciled terminal semantics remain intact and are not rewritten as generic queue waiting.

### Edge Cases

- A queued run is stale but has no trustworthy worker correlation or job identifier.
- A running run has determinate counts but is still past the lifecycle window.
- A run is unsupported by current lifecycle policy and therefore should not receive stale overclaiming.
- A run became terminal through `scheduled_reconciler` or `adapter_reconciler`.
- A system-initiated run has no human initiator but still needs honest lifecycle wording.
- Existing phase or composite progress hints exist in context and must not override stale lifecycle truth with false reassurance.

## Requirements *(mandatory)*

- **FR-358-001**: The system MUST keep `OperationRun.status` and `OperationRun.outcome` as the only persisted lifecycle fields for this slice.
- **FR-358-002**: Generic queue truth MUST be derived from current lifecycle, freshness, and trusted context only.
- **FR-358-003**: A run that is `likely_stale` by current lifecycle policy MUST NOT render ordinary queue or ordinary progress reassurance as visible stale-active guidance on shell, list, or canonical detail surfaces, whether that reassurance appears alone or alongside a stale label, banner, or attention cue.
- **FR-358-004**: Fresh queued and fresh running runs MUST remain visibly calm and MUST NOT inherit stale emphasis.
- **FR-358-005**: Existing scheduled or adapter reconciliation paths MUST remain authoritative for terminal truth where they already exist.
- **FR-358-006**: This feature MUST NOT introduce a new queue-orphaned, reconciled, or business-success persistence family.
- **FR-358-007**: This feature MUST NOT claim hard orphaned queue state unless current repo truth already provides trustworthy legitimacy evidence for that specific run.
- **FR-358-008**: Existing `OperationRun` links, queued toasts, browser events, and terminal notification paths MUST remain unchanged.
- **FR-358-009**: Existing workspace and tenant authorization boundaries MUST remain unchanged.
- **FR-358-010**: The canonical monitoring list, shell hint, and canonical run detail MUST use one aligned generic lifecycle vocabulary for fresh queued/running work, stale active work, and reconciled terminal work.
- **FR-358-011**: The implementation MUST stay within current helper ownership unless one small local helper is required to avoid unreadable presenter logic.
- **FR-358-012**: Focused unit and feature coverage MUST prove both positive and negative cases for fresh vs stale queue truth.

## Success Criteria *(mandatory)*

- **SC-358-001**: In focused regression coverage, stale queued/running runs no longer mix stale attention with ordinary queue/progress reassurance on the affected surfaces.
- **SC-358-002**: In focused regression coverage, fresh queued/running runs remain calm and do not falsely escalate to stale.
- **SC-358-003**: Existing reconciled terminal behavior remains intact for runs already completed by scheduled or adapter truth.
- **SC-358-004**: No new persisted lifecycle field, queue artifact, or adapter framework is introduced.

## Assumptions

- The current contradiction is a derived UX-truth problem, not a missing persistence problem.
- Existing lifecycle policy thresholds remain valid for this slice.
- Existing generic and adapter reconciliation commands remain out of scope except as historical context the UI must respect.

## Risks

- **Over-correction**: the slice could make all active work sound problematic. Mitigation: explicit fresh vs stale negative assertions.
- **Framework creep**: the slice could drift into a new generic queue-health subsystem. Mitigation: no new persistence, no new adapter registry, and explicit out-of-scope boundaries.
- **Detail/list drift survives**: one renderer could remain on old wording. Mitigation: focused list + detail + shell coverage in the same package.

## Out of Scope

- Queue worker health automation
- New scheduler, command, or job families
- New `OperationRun` statuses or outcomes
- Domain-success reconciliation for review, restore, backup, sync, or export runs
- Adapter framework expansion
- New Filament resources, routes, or destructive actions