Plan reader

The @orgdevkit/kit-plan-reader member surfaces — the overview a person arrives on, the chapter reader with its three-verb reaction grammar and the thread that opens under it, and the change log that is the only account of how the plan changed. Over one synthetic plan about a shared workspace: no engine, no model, nothing written anywhere.

Where you are, and what is true today

The kit navigates nothing — the address below is this page's, handed to each screen as the ways out it offers. The switches are the design's own honest-state switches, and they compose: a spent budget stands above the first-run wait and above the plan, because it is true in both.

The last two switches belong to the domains segment at the foot of the overview, and the thing to watch there is what does not move. Each domain says how many papers it holds and what may honestly be said about how the searching is going — and the three states never say finished, because the measurement behind them knows how often this research has asked about a domain, not whether the literature has run out. Turn on a research that has just started and every state changes while every count stays exactly where it was: the papers are counted from the library, and the state is a separate fact about the asking. One domain holds nothing at all, and it is the only row with no way through to the library — there is no filter to land on.

Above the segment sits the one block on this screen that asks rather than reports: a research direction that this person's own uploads and intake answers proposed, waiting for them to say yes or no. The owner chose that confirm step over steering the research automatically, and his reason is what the row is built around — automatic steering sends details drawn from somebody's medical documents out to external search services with nobody having agreed to it. So the sentence saying what was read, and where is in the row itself and never behind a why?, and the read model refuses to draw a proposal that cannot say. Answer one and watch two things happen: the question leaves and does not come back — a rejection is stored, not dismissed — and a confirmed one turns up at the bottom of the domains segment as a domain nothing has been searched for yet. Reload the page to be asked again.

home

Your research

Overview

version 3
Round conversationPick up where you left off
So the two hours would be the same two every day, not moved about?
What you wrote is still there word for word, and nothing expires. There is no reminder by mail: this block is the reminder, and it stays until the conversation is finished.
There is a check-in waiting for youNow and then we ask whether your research question is still the same. Five minutes. Leaving it is a real option; there is no reminder.
Your planRound 3 open
3of 9 points processed

3 of 9 points carry your reaction · 2 questions are open. There is no target figure. This is only where you are.

How far the plan itself has got
AI draft
5
Checked
3
Seen with an expert
1

Every point stands at one of these three. A point re-cut into the first chapter is still one point, counted where it lives.

member-budget · 4.6today's spend panel
reviewer · 4.4the support team
What changed in your plan6 changes
Something in your own material3 questions

While reading what you handed over, the research team came across a subject that is not in your research yet. Nothing is searched about it until you say so.

How long your journey to work is

This comes fromThe team rota you uploaded on 2 June, which lists a start time an hour before your shift begins.

Leaving it out means it is not researched, and we do not ask you about it again.

Recovery intervals following consecutive night rotationsThe name the research team files it under

This comes fromYour intake answer about your working week, where you wrote that you are on nights three weeks in four.

Leaving it out means it is not researched, and we do not ask you about it again.

Working against your own body clock

This comes fromYour intake answers about when you sleep on your days off, read beside the rota you uploaded on 2 June.

Leaving it out means it is not researched, and we do not ask you about it again.

As long as a question is waiting here, no new ones are added. There is no hurry: the rest of your research carries on either way.

What your research is looking into5 domains

These are the domains the research team is searching in for you. The papers it finds in each one are in your source library.

Focused hoursStill turning up new work
9 papers
Meeting-free policiesStill turning up new work
7 papers
Time-zone overlapNot turning up new work lately
5 papers
Open-plan noiseNot searched often enough yet to say anything
3 papers
Chronotype and shift timingNot searched often enough yet to say anything
0 papersNothing found here yet

Your data

The one chapter of the plan whose content is not the research team's words (§15). Every value here came out of a document somebody uploaded, or was typed in by them, and it is the only place in the whole product where a person may delete something: a blood value is not a claim anybody made, so it is theirs to take back. The schema says so rather than a component — this kit forbids delete on every other table it owns.

The four buttons are four row sets, not four renderings: the panel takes no state prop, so a single reading becomes a strip and a second one turns it into a chart with nobody deciding. Watch the November haemoglobin reading in the first state — it sits inside the shaded band and its row still says below the range, because the band is the newest report's and every reading is judged against the range of the report it came from. And the substance is spelled three ways across those documents, which is what the “one substance, one chart” note is made of: the spellings are read off the rows, so a card whose documents agreed says nothing.

Your data

8 readings

Readings to check

There is nothing to check. Every reading here was read clearly.

Measured more than once

Hbhaemoglobin, the oxygen carrier in blood4 readings · 3 May 2024 to 14 May 2026 · from [e2]

Your documents call this Hb, haemoglobin and hemoglobin. One substance, one chart.

The shaded band is the range from your most recent report (7,5 to 10 mmol/L). Each reading is compared with the range of the report it came from, so a reading can sit inside the band and still say it was outside its own range.

11 November 2024 · 7,6 mmol/L · outside the range of the report it came from (7,8 to 10,5 mmol/L)

DateValueCompared with its own reportFromChange a reading
3 May 20248,1 mmol/L within the range[e2]
11 November 20247,6 mmol/L below the range[e2]
20 April 20258 mmol/L within the range[e2]
14 May 20268,3 mmol/L within the range[e2]
Vitamin D25-OH vitamin D in blood2 readings · 8 November 2024 to 14 May 2026 · from [e2]

The shaded band is the range from your most recent report (50 to 150 nmol/L). Each reading is compared with the range of the report it came from, so a reading can sit inside the band and still say it was outside its own range.

8 November 2024 · 41 nmol/L · outside the range of the report it came from (50 to 150 nmol/L)

DateValueCompared with its own reportFromChange a reading
8 November 202441 nmol/L below the range[e2]
14 May 202674 nmol/L within the range[e2]

Measured once

CRP

inflammation marker in blood
6 mg/L12 March 2026under 10 mg/L within the range

1 reading · 12 March 2026 · from [e1]

One reading, so there is no line: a line through a single point would draw a course nobody measured. A second reading turns this into a chart on its own.

ESR

sedimentation rate, a second measure of inflammation
14 mm/h12 March 2026under 20 mm/h within the range

1 reading · 12 March 2026

One reading, so there is no line: a line through a single point would draw a course nobody measured. A second reading turns this into a chart on its own.

14 mm/h · 12 March 2026 · entered by you

What this research is for

The scope modal (§7e): the brief's own words, and the clauses that say what the research leaves out. Those clauses are written against who a study is about, what it set out to do and what kind of evidence it is — never against a subject, because the unexpected link is the point. The four buttons are the four states a scope can be in; the two empty ones are different facts and stay apart.

In the product this opens from the details button on the domains segment of the overview, and that button is live above — the segment landed with the per-tag yield measurement behind it. The button here opens the same modal, and it is the quick way to look at all four scope states without leaving this block.

The modal now carries its editing chat. There is no model behind it here: the answers are a four-step script, and the third step is the model doing the wrong thing — complying with a request to leave out a subject. Watch what happens to that clause. It is refused by the kit rather than by the model, said out loud, and there is nothing to save; a model that behaved well would never show you that. The fourth step comes back unreadable, which is the state that proves your own words were stored before anything was asked.

What the host was asked to do

Every verb the screens do not perform themselves leaves through a prop. Here they are accepted and recorded — nothing is written, nothing is sent, and no model reads along.

  1. Nothing asked of the host yet.