You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I found 3 high-risk assumption(s) in this issue that might be worth making explicit. These aren't criticisms — they're invitations to align.
1. Backend API availability
"Provide the notification center UI with unread counts, filters, and actions."\n\nThe assumption: There exist server-side APIs and contracts to provide unread counts, queryable filters, and actions (mark read/delete/act) that the UI can call.
Why it matters: Without these endpoints or agreed contracts, the UI can't be implemented or will require backend work that blocks frontend progress.
Question for the team: Are there existing APIs and an owner for notification counts, filtering, and actions? If not, can we agree on the API contract and timeline?
2. Notification data model & semantics
"Provide the notification center UI with unread counts, filters, and actions."\n\nThe assumption: The schema and semantics (what counts as unread, available filter fields, time ranges, ownership) are defined and stable.
Why it matters: Unclear or changing semantics will cause rework across frontend/backends and could change UX behavior.
Question for the team: Who defines the notification schema and can we document the fields/semantics needed by the UI?
3. Performance & consistency expectations
"Provide the notification center UI with unread counts, filters, and actions."\n\nThe assumption: Unread counts and filters can be returned at acceptable latency and consistency for expected traffic.
Why it matters: Calculating counts or filtering at read time can be expensive at scale; this may require pre-aggregation or eventual consistency trade-offs.
Question for the team: Do we need real-time accurate counts at scale, or is eventual consistency acceptable? Who can advise on expected traffic/scale?
🤔 Things Not Mentioned
Design/UX mockups — who will provide them? — Product or Design.
Accessibility requirements (keyboard, screen reader) — Accessibility lead or PM.
Analytics/telemetry for notification interactions — Analytics or PM.
🧩 This comment was generated by the Assumption Surfacer workflow to help the team reason together. Reply to any assumption above to share your perspective.
Activity
chrizbo commentedon Jun 8, 2026
Created related issue: #282
github-actions commentedon Jun 8, 2026
🔍 Assumptions Worth Discussing
I found 3 high-risk assumption(s) in this issue that might be worth making explicit. These aren't criticisms — they're invitations to align.
1. Backend API availability
Why it matters: Without these endpoints or agreed contracts, the UI can't be implemented or will require backend work that blocks frontend progress.
Question for the team: Are there existing APIs and an owner for notification counts, filtering, and actions? If not, can we agree on the API contract and timeline?
2. Notification data model & semantics
Why it matters: Unclear or changing semantics will cause rework across frontend/backends and could change UX behavior.
Question for the team: Who defines the notification schema and can we document the fields/semantics needed by the UI?
3. Performance & consistency expectations
Why it matters: Calculating counts or filtering at read time can be expensive at scale; this may require pre-aggregation or eventual consistency trade-offs.
Question for the team: Do we need real-time accurate counts at scale, or is eventual consistency acceptable? Who can advise on expected traffic/scale?
🤔 Things Not Mentioned
🧩 This comment was generated by the Assumption Surfacer workflow to help the team reason together. Reply to any assumption above to share your perspective.