Contact histories — qualification

Record status

Record ID

field-guide:contact-histories

Parent lifecycle

candidate

Page lane

docs_urls

Lane lifecycle

proposed

Owner

Wick

Owner role

Not separately recorded

Owner status

Not separately recorded

Qualification result

NOT RUN · held for evidence and human review

Working browser surface: Field guides — documentation — Inspect the guide and persist local checkpoints. This route is local-only; provider, credential, database, customer, publication, deployment, and production effects remain held.

Qualification status

Result

NOT RUN

Disposition

HELD

Reviewer

Not recorded

Receipt

Not recorded

This page defines proposed acceptance criteria for the docs_urls lane. It does not execute tests, establish compliance, qualify the subject, or authorize an effect.

Outcome definitions

Verified

All stated evidence and acceptance requirements passed for the exact reviewed revision; this still does not authorize deployment or an external effect.

Failed

One or more deterministic acceptance requirements failed with an inspectable reason.

Needs review

Evidence or interpretation is incomplete, conflicting, or awaits an identified human reviewer.

Held

Authority, required evidence, safe execution conditions, or a principal gate is absent.

The current record remains NOT RUN / HELD. These definitions describe candidate outcomes only.

Proposed deterministic acceptance tests

Route-resolution and distinct-content checks apply only to the admitted canonical routes in this record. Held source-proposed extensions are non-resolving proposals and are excluded.

• Every proposed guide URL has a distinct purpose and content outline; none is a doorway page or keyword-only variant.
• The overview explains scope, record ownership, evidence states, held external effects, and known failure states.
• A reader can create one contact-history record and one event using implementable fields without relying on an unverified provider connection.
• Chronology output visibly separates observed facts, inference, gaps, conflicts, and next actions.
• A duplicate event can be flagged and linked without destructive merge or loss of provenance.
• A missing, conflicting, or malformed source produces a review state and preserved failure reason rather than silent omission.
• Message drafting cannot be represented as external sending, and a response cannot be marked confirmed without source evidence.
• Every follow-up has an explicit owner or an explicit unassigned state; deadlines and priority are inspectable.
• The guide links each related job to a distinct next action and preserves shared canonical records rather than copying events.
• The guide is accessible by keyboard, uses labelled fields, exposes status text without color-only meaning, and provides readable chronology order.
• All pages and app links are labelled as proposed, indexed, or prototype according to the supplied contract; no page claims deployment, publication, customer indexing, provider connection, database authority, or qualification.

Negative and held-state tests

• Incomplete source access can be mistaken for a complete contact history.
• Identity collisions can merge separate people or organizations.
• Timezone, forwarded-message, and imported-file dates can produce false chronology.
• Inference can be mistaken for observed fact.
• Drafts can be mistaken for sent messages or provider-confirmed delivery.
• A response category can be mistaken for a verified response.
• Sensitive contact information may cross private and public visibility boundaries.
• Duplicate local records can create contradictory campaign counts.
• Deadlines may be treated as automation or external calendar writes despite held provider effects.
• Native route names indicate bounded interfaces, not connected production features.

Qualification claim boundary

Potentially allowed only after the stated evidence

• This guide proposes a source-labelled method for organizing contact-history records.
• The guide can document chronology, provenance, gaps, drafts, response states, and review receipts as bounded local records.
• The supplied contract supports canonical IDs, provenance, revisions, lifecycle, links, attachments, and deadline-oriented to-do fields.
• Related work can be linked to the named jobs: World-post research, Outreach dossiers, Message drafts, Response triage, and Campaign chronology.

Still held

• No claim that Wick or any provider is connected.
• No claim that external inboxes, calendars, CRMs, databases, or customer records are retrieved or authoritative.
• No claim that messages are sent, delivered, or responded to externally.
• No claim that contact histories are complete, published, customer-indexed, qualified, or deployed.
• No claim that a proposed chronology establishes identity, consent, relationship status, or campaign performance.

Sources and evidence

These pointers bind the page to evidence. They do not grant authority or collapse verification into deployment.

• source_record:field-guide:contact-histories
• agents/index.html#wick
• observed_native_contract.project_and_field_guide_collections
• observed_native_contract.deadlines
• observed_native_contract.records
• observed_native_contract.pointguard
• app_routes:/app/notebook/field-guides/
• app_routes:/app/notebook/notes/
• app_routes:/app/notebook/files/
• app_routes:/app/notebook/to-dos/
• app_routes:/app/notebook/messages/
• app_routes:/app/notebook/approvals/
• app_routes:/app/notebook/search/
• app_routes:/app/pointguard/