Input triage prompt — ask the right questions when a file predicts a poor result (Aristide 2026-08-27)

kerfmaster pin list · UI / workflow decisions

intentWhat we want to build. Never claimed the present, so it cannot be stale — and must never be read as a description of the code.

Content last changed 2026-08-27 — computed from the item itself, not typed.

Intent (Aristide, 2026-08-27, on the 3A76 scan-vs-DWG outcome). Not build authorization — record the design, build later (phase rule).

At file load, the pipeline already knows a lot (raster vs vector, scale provable or not, leader ink touching the outline, callouts that don't reconcile). When that analysis predicts a degraded result, the interface asks before work proceeds — a pop-up prompt was Aristide's sketch. The questions that would have saved the 3A76 round:

• Is the customer's native CAD available? (DXF/DWG/STEP beats any trace — ask for it FIRST, by name.)
• Confirm ambiguous callout-to-feature mappings — show the feature, show the callout(s), let the operator bind them (the .316/.283 D-hole).
• State the expected accuracy bound vs the print's tolerance block (scan ±0.01 vs title block ±0.005) and require an explicit 'proceed anyway' to continue on a source that cannot meet its own print.

Ties to: per-contour override intent, nest↔tooling feedback loop — same principle, the operator decides at the point where the software knows it's guessing.