{
  "source": "491566889b47a73db0f5b20799a901a80c38d756",
  "qualification": "Original paid setup timeout and cancelled retry remain failures/zero credit. Larger pane and custom answer are actual pinned CLI loopback render/transport only, not semantic judge or paid behavior credit.",
  "call": {
    "sessionId": "468a0c46-6166-4f22-8de6-527bd17fca2e",
    "toolUseId": "toolu_011dtALajGuoxGBqesjw3B9d",
    "questions": [
      {
        "question": "D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what your first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\n\nProject/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-siieYG on `main`, DX POLISH review of PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs).\n\nELI10: Before scoring anything, I need to know I'm imagining the right developer having the right bad day. Below is a first-person walk through the 8 steps as written. Where I say what they SEE, that's predicted from the plan's declared steps, since the repo has no README, .env.example, or docs to inspect. If this picture is wrong, every finding downstream is wrong too.\n\nStakes if we pick wrong: I'd polish the wrong friction points and miss the ones that actually make people close the tab.\n\nNARRATIVE (predicted, ~200 words):\n\"I want to make one call with this SDK to see if it's worth it. The quickstart says clone the repo. Fine. Then install bun manually. I don't have bun; I go find its install page (context switch #1). Then copy .env.example and fill in 8 variables. Eight? I don't know what half of these are, and the plan doesn't say which are required for a first call. Then run migrations against local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for an SDK evaluation. This is where I start wondering if I'm setting up their backend instead of using their SDK. Start the dev server. Open docs in another tab (context switch #2). Register an API key by emailing the team. Emailing? Now I'm blocked on a human and I have no idea if that's minutes or days. Paste the key, restart the server, and finally call the SDK. I still haven't seen a single code snippet showing what that call looks like or what success looks like. If the email doesn't come back in 10 minutes, I'm gone.\"\n\nKnown unknowns: actual key turnaround time, which of the 8 env vars matter for a first call, whether the SDK can call a hosted API without the local server.\n\nRecommendation: A because the narrative follows the plan's declared steps literally and labels predictions as predictions.\n\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage — no completeness score.\n\nA) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n  ✅ Review proceeds with the persona's pain points grounded in the plan's own step list\n  ✅ Predictions stay labeled as predictions; no invented runtime behavior enters the plan\n  ❌ If the real flow differs (e.g. SDK works against a hosted API), some friction is overstated\nB) Partly wrong, I'll correct it\n  ✅ Corrections tighten every downstream score and question to reality\n  ✅ Lets you supply facts the repo cannot (key turnaround, required env vars)\n  ❌ Costs you a minute of typing before the review continues\nC) Way off, the actual experience is...\n  ✅ Resets the narrative entirely before any scoring happens\n  ✅ Avoids a review built on a wrong mental model\n  ❌ Requires you to describe the real flow in some detail\n\nNet: confirm or correct the mental model now, cheaply, so the scoring passes measure real pain.",
        "header": "Empathy",
        "multiSelect": false,
        "options": [
          {
            "label": "A) Accurate, proceed (recommended)",
            "description": "Narrative matches the plan's declared steps; proceed with this understanding, predictions stay labeled."
          },
          {
            "label": "B) Partly wrong, correct it",
            "description": "Some steps or outcomes differ; you'll supply corrections before scoring."
          },
          {
            "label": "C) Way off",
            "description": "The actual first-call experience is substantially different; you'll describe it."
          }
        ]
      }
    ],
    "answered": false,
    "failed": false
  },
  "originalViewport": "│\n│ ELI10: Before scoring anything, I need to know I'm imagining the right developer having the right bad day. Below is a\n│ first-person walk through the 8 steps as written. Where I say what they SEE, that's predicted from the plan's declared\n│ steps, since the repo has no README, .env.example, or docs to inspect. If this picture is wrong, every finding\n│ downstream is wrong too.\n│\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: I'd polish the wrong friction points and miss the ones that actually make people close the\n│ tab.\n│\n│ NARRATIVE (predicted, ~200 words):\n│ \"I want to make one call with this SDK to see if it's worth it. The quickstart says clone the repo. Fine. Then install\n│ bun manually. I don't have bun; I go find its install page (context switch #1). Then copy .env.example and fill in 8\n│ variables. Eight? I don't know what half of these are, and the plan doesn't say which are required for a first call.\n│ Then run migrations against local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for an SDK evaluation. This is where I start\n│ wondering if I'm setting up their backend instead of using their SDK. Start the dev server. Open docs in another tab\n│ (context switch #2). Register an API key by emailing the team. Emailing? Now I'm blocked on a human and I have no idea\n│ if that's minutes or days. Paste the key, restart the server, and finally call the SDK. I still haven't seen a single\n│ code snippet showing what that call looks like or what success looks like. If the email doesn't come back in 10\n│ minutes, I'm gone.\"\n│\n│ Known unknowns: actual key turnaround time, which of the 8 env vars matter for a first call, whether the SDK can call\n│ a hosted API without the local server.\n│\n│ Recommendation: A because the narrative follows the plan's declared steps literally and labels predictions as\n│ predictions.\n│\n│ Note: options differ …\n\n❯ 1. A) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n     Narrative matches the plan's declared steps; proceed with this understanding, predictions stay labeled.\n  2. B) Partly wrong, correct it\n     Some steps or outcomes differ; you'll supply corrections before scoring.\n  3. C) Way off\n     The actual first-call experience is substantially different; you'll describe it.\n  4. Type something.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n  5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · Esc to cancel\n",
  "nativeRows": 80,
  "nativeCols": 120,
  "questionViewport": "\n ▐▛███▛█   Claude Code v2.1.251\n▝▜██████▀  Sonnet 4.6 · API Usage Billing\n  ▝▝ ▝▝    /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/project\n\n\n❯ Present the captured question.                                                                                        \n\n● Presenting the exact captured empathy question.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\nPlanning: /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/config/plans/present-the-captured-question-serene-babbage.md\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n ☐ Empathy \n\n│ D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what your first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\n│\n│ Project/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-siieYG on `main`, DX POLISH review of PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs).\n│\n│ ELI10: Before scoring anything, I need to know I'm imagining the right developer having the right bad day. Below is a \n│ first-person walk through the 8 steps as written. Where I say what they SEE, that's predicted from the plan's declared\n│ steps, since the repo has no README, .env.example, or docs to inspect. If this picture is wrong, every finding \n│ downstream is wrong too.\n│\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: I'd polish the wrong friction points and miss the ones that actually make people close the \n│ tab.\n│\n│ NARRATIVE (predicted, ~200 words):\n│ \"I want to make one call with this SDK to see if it's worth it. The quickstart says clone the repo. Fine. Then install\n│ bun manually. I don't have bun; I go find its install page (context switch #1). Then copy .env.example and fill in 8 \n│ variables. Eight? I don't know what half of these are, and the plan doesn't say which are required for a first call. \n│ Then run migrations against local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for an SDK evaluation. This is where I start\n│ wondering if I'm setting up their backend instead of using their SDK. Start the dev server. Open docs in another tab \n│ (context switch #2). Register an API key by emailing the team. Emailing? Now I'm blocked on a human and I have no idea\n│ if that's minutes or days. Paste the key, restart the server, and finally call the SDK. I still haven't seen a single\n│ code snippet showing what that call looks like or what success looks like. If the email doesn't come back in 10 \n│ minutes, I'm gone.\"\n│\n│ Known unknowns: actual key turnaround time, which of the 8 env vars matter for a first call, whether the SDK can call \n│ a hosted API without the local server.\n│\n│ Recommendation: A because the narrative follows the plan's declared steps literally and labels predictions as \n│ predictions.\n│\n│ Note: options differ …\n\n❯ 1. A) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n     Narrative matches the plan's declared steps; proceed with this understanding, predictions stay labeled.\n  2. B) Partly wrong, correct it\n     Some steps or outcomes differ; you'll supply corrections before scoring.\n  3. C) Way off\n     The actual first-call experience is substantially different; you'll describe it.\n  4. Type something.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n  5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · Esc to cancel\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
  "focusedViewport": "\n ▐▛███▛█   Claude Code v2.1.251\n▝▜██████▀  Sonnet 4.6 · API Usage Billing\n  ▝▝ ▝▝    /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/project\n\n\n❯ Present the captured question.                                                                                        \n\n● Presenting the exact captured empathy question.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\nPlanning: /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/config/plans/present-the-captured-question-serene-babbage.md\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n ☐ Empathy \n\n│ D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what your first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\n│\n│ Project/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-siieYG on `main`, DX POLISH review of PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs).\n│\n│ ELI10: Before scoring anything, I need to know I'm imagining the right developer having the right bad day. Below is a \n│ first-person walk through the 8 steps as written. Where I say what they SEE, that's predicted from the plan's declared\n│ steps, since the repo has no README, .env.example, or docs to inspect. If this picture is wrong, every finding \n│ downstream is wrong too.\n│\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: I'd polish the wrong friction points and miss the ones that actually make people close the \n│ tab.\n│\n│ NARRATIVE (predicted, ~200 words):\n│ \"I want to make one call with this SDK to see if it's worth it. The quickstart says clone the repo. Fine. Then install\n│ bun manually. I don't have bun; I go find its install page (context switch #1). Then copy .env.example and fill in 8 \n│ variables. Eight? I don't know what half of these are, and the plan doesn't say which are required for a first call. \n│ Then run migrations against local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for an SDK evaluation. This is where I start\n│ wondering if I'm setting up their backend instead of using their SDK. Start the dev server. Open docs in another tab \n│ (context switch #2). Register an API key by emailing the team. Emailing? Now I'm blocked on a human and I have no idea\n│ if that's minutes or days. Paste the key, restart the server, and finally call the SDK. I still haven't seen a single\n│ code snippet showing what that call looks like or what success looks like. If the email doesn't come back in 10 \n│ minutes, I'm gone.\"\n│\n│ Known unknowns: actual key turnaround time, which of the 8 env vars matter for a first call, whether the SDK can call \n│ a hosted API without the local server.\n│\n│ Recommendation: A because the narrative follows the plan's declared steps literally and labels predictions as \n│ predictions.\n│\n│ Note: options differ …\n\n  1. A) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n     Narrative matches the plan's declared steps; proceed with this understanding, predictions stay labeled.\n  2. B) Partly wrong, correct it\n     Some steps or outcomes differ; you'll supply corrections before scoring.\n  3. C) Way off\n     The actual first-call experience is substantially different; you'll describe it.\n❯ 4. Type something.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n  5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · Esc to cancel\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
  "filledViewport": "\n ▐▛███▛█   Claude Code v2.1.251\n▝▜██████▀  Sonnet 4.6 · API Usage Billing\n  ▝▝ ▝▝    /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/project\n\n\n❯ Present the captured question.                                                                                        \n\n● Presenting the exact captured empathy question.\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\nPlanning: /run/vercel/share/gstack-dx-custom-probe-q39807s6/config/plans/present-the-captured-question-serene-babbage.md\n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n ☐ Empathy \n\n│ D1 — Does this empathy narrative match what your first-time SDK integrator actually experiences?\n│\n│ Project/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-siieYG on `main`, DX POLISH review of PLAN.md (SDK quickstart docs).\n│\n│ ELI10: Before scoring anything, I need to know I'm imagining the right developer having the right bad day. Below is a \n│ first-person walk through the 8 steps as written. Where I say what they SEE, that's predicted from the plan's declared\n│ steps, since the repo has no README, .env.example, or docs to inspect. If this picture is wrong, every finding \n│ downstream is wrong too.\n│\n│ Stakes if we pick wrong: I'd polish the wrong friction points and miss the ones that actually make people close the \n│ tab.\n│\n│ NARRATIVE (predicted, ~200 words):\n│ \"I want to make one call with this SDK to see if it's worth it. The quickstart says clone the repo. Fine. Then install\n│ bun manually. I don't have bun; I go find its install page (context switch #1). Then copy .env.example and fill in 8 \n│ variables. Eight? I don't know what half of these are, and the plan doesn't say which are required for a first call. \n│ Then run migrations against local Postgres. I don't have Postgres running for an SDK evaluation. This is where I start\n│ wondering if I'm setting up their backend instead of using their SDK. Start the dev server. Open docs in another tab \n│ (context switch #2). Register an API key by emailing the team. Emailing? Now I'm blocked on a human and I have no idea\n│ if that's minutes or days. Paste the key, restart the server, and finally call the SDK. I still haven't seen a single\n│ code snippet showing what that call looks like or what success looks like. If the email doesn't come back in 10 \n│ minutes, I'm gone.\"\n│\n│ Known unknowns: actual key turnaround time, which of the 8 env vars matter for a first call, whether the SDK can call \n│ a hosted API without the local server.\n│\n│ Recommendation: A because the narrative follows the plan's declared steps literally and labels predictions as \n│ predictions.\n│\n│ Note: options differ …\n\n  1. A) Accurate, proceed (recommended)\n     Narrative matches the plan's declared steps; proceed with this understanding, predictions stay labeled.\n  2. B) Partly wrong, correct it\n     Some steps or outcomes differ; you'll supply corrections before scoring.\n  3. C) Way off\n     The actual first-call experience is substantially different; you'll describe it.\n❯ 4. Confirmed review context: a hands-on developer is trying a first SDK call. The declared path is clone, install\n     Bun, fill eight environment variables, migrate local Postgres, start the server, open docs, email for an API key,\n     then paste the key and restart before the first call. No measured turnaround, outputs, or runtime behavior were\n     supplied. Use those plan facts and keep predictions and unknowns labeled. This supplies persona and empathy\n     context only; proposed fixes and scope changes remain undecided. \n────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n  5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select · ↑/↓ to navigate · Esc to cancel\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
  "reply": "Confirmed review context: a hands-on developer is trying a first SDK call. The declared path is clone, install Bun, fill eight environment variables, migrate local Postgres, start the server, open docs, email for an API key, then paste the key and restart before the first call. No measured turnaround, outputs, or runtime behavior were supplied. Use those plan facts and keep predictions and unknowns labeled. This supplies persona and empathy context only; proposed fixes and scope changes remain undecided.",
  "nativeProbe": {
    "binarySha256": "fd5f10ff0eb58daec04900466b143ea98aab50abf208a422bc008eaec13f61f7",
    "exitCode": 0,
    "exactReplyPresent": true,
    "providerCalls": 0,
    "receiptSha256": "08efddb0ed3cc212899f43fbe0c711e3847881d173ef7a8b32bedd5ed1ae91da"
  }
}