Judgment detail
One signal, fully reasoned: what goal it was meant to move, how good the work is on its own terms, and whether it was the highest-leverage use of capacity.
Manual QA regression · Hytech
6h logged across two days re-running the full WhatsApp QR flow by hand after every deploy. Note: 'no automated e2e yet, doing it manually each release'.
What the engine inferred
The three scores
never a single numberDimension breakdown
how output value was earnedThe manual QA itself is done diligently — but by hand.
Repetitive, copy-paste process with no leverage.
Catches bugs but doesn't prevent them or scale.
Judgment trace
question → finding- 1
What goal was this meant to move?
Reliability, indirectly — but 6h of manual regression every release is a system smell.
- 2
How good is the work on its own terms?
Diligent but low-leverage; this is exactly what !407 is starting to automate.
- 3
Was this the highest-leverage use of capacity?
No — and it's not Amer's fault. The system lacks e2e automation, so a junior burns 6h/release.
Narrative
Score the system, not Amer. Six hours of by-hand regression per release is a process failure, not a performance one. The good news is the fix is already in flight (!407). The story here is: finish the e2e harness so this time disappears.
Action ladder
how far the engine will goTreat !407 as priority-zero for the junior. Every automated flow erases hours of this manual work across the whole team.