# Investigation Report Example

**Author**: Matthew Raymer
**Date**: 2025-08-19
**Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Investigation methodology example

## Investigation — Registration Dialog Test Flakiness

## Objective

Identify root cause of flaky tests related to registration dialogs in contact
import scenarios.

## System Map

- User action → ContactInputForm → ContactsView.addContact() →
  handleRegistrationPrompt()
- setTimeout(1000ms) → Modal dialog → User response → Registration API call
- Test execution → Wait for dialog → Assert dialog content → Click response
  button

## Findings (Evidence)

- **1-second timeout causes flakiness** — evidence:
  `src/views/ContactsView.vue:971-1000`; setTimeout(..., 1000) in
  handleRegistrationPrompt()
- **Import flow bypasses dialogs** — evidence:
  `src/views/ContactImportView.vue:500-520`; importContacts() calls
  $insertContact() directly, no handleRegistrationPrompt()
- **Dialog only appears in direct add flow** — evidence:
  `src/views/ContactsView.vue:774-800`; addContact() calls
  handleRegistrationPrompt() after database insert

## Hypotheses & Failure Modes

- H1: 1-second timeout makes dialog appearance unpredictable; would fail when
  tests run faster than 1000ms
- H2: Test environment timing differs from development; watch for CI vs local
  test differences

## Corrections

- Updated: "Multiple dialogs interfere with imports" → "Import flow never
  triggers dialogs - they only appear in direct contact addition"
- Updated: "Complex batch registration needed" → "Simple timeout removal and
  test mode flag sufficient"

## Diagnostics (Next Checks)

- [ ] Repro on CI environment vs local
- [ ] Measure actual dialog appearance timing
- [ ] Test with setTimeout removed
- [ ] Verify import flow doesn't call handleRegistrationPrompt

## Risks & Scope

- Impacted: Contact addition tests, registration workflow tests; Data: None;
  Users: Test suite reliability

## Decision / Next Steps

- Owner: Development Team; By: 2025-01-28
- Action: Remove 1-second timeout + add test mode flag; Exit criteria: Tests
  pass consistently

## References

- `src/views/ContactsView.vue:971-1000`
- `src/views/ContactImportView.vue:500-520`
- `src/views/ContactsView.vue:774-800`

## Competence Hooks

- Why this works: Code path tracing revealed separate execution flows,
  evidence disproved initial assumptions
- Common pitfalls: Assuming related functionality without tracing execution
  paths, over-engineering solutions to imaginary problems
- Next skill: Learn to trace code execution before proposing architectural
  changes
- Teach-back: "What evidence shows that contact imports bypass registration
  dialogs?"

## Key Learning Points

### Evidence-First Approach

This investigation demonstrates the importance of:

1. **Tracing actual code execution** rather than making assumptions
2. **Citing specific evidence** with file:line references
3. **Validating problem scope** before proposing solutions
4. **Considering simpler alternatives** before complex architectural changes

### Code Path Tracing Value

By tracing the execution paths, we discovered:

- Import flow and direct add flow are completely separate
- The "multiple dialog interference" problem didn't exist
- A simple timeout removal would solve the actual issue

### Prevention of Over-Engineering

The investigation prevented:

- Unnecessary database schema changes
- Complex batch registration systems
- Migration scripts for non-existent problems
- Architectural changes based on assumptions

---

**Status**: Active investigation methodology
**Priority**: High
**Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference
**Dependencies**: software_development.mdc
**Stakeholders**: Development team, QA team
