TR-2517 internal admin operations

Review queues, escalation pressure, and audit evidence in one calm surface.

This admin surface stays read-heavy by default. It separates support review, sensitive exceptions, trust surfaces, and audit posture so operations do not collapse into one blurry page.

What needs attention now

1

Open support cases

0

Escalation-flagged assistant events

1

Aging open cases

0

Billing-sensitive cases

Admin surface map

The ops surface should feel like one coherent control plane, not a pile of disconnected internal tools.

Overview

Attention now, aging work, degraded states, and pending review signals.

Support and operations

Support intake, escalations, repeated blockers, and incident-adjacent review.

Billing and hardship

Sensitive exception review separated from normal support inspection.

Content and trust surfaces

Public-trust review, parity posture, and content approval awareness.

Product controls

Bounded launch toggles with visible owner, scope, and consequence.

Reporting and analytics

Canonical metrics and actionable signals, not vanity dashboards.

Audit and history

Evidence-first timelines for what happened already.

System and access

Privilege-sensitive references isolated from routine admin flow.

CHMS operating core

Open the live CHMS workspace for people, households, scope, and audit.

Privilege boundary map

Seeing a record should not imply broad change rights, and sensitive areas should feel structurally distinct.

Sensitivity classes

  • Normal admin visibility
  • Restricted business-sensitive visibility
  • Restricted financial visibility
  • Restricted identity or access visibility
  • Platform-admin visibility

Boundary rules

  • Support visibility does not imply billing or access mutation rights.
  • Read-heavy inspection stays separate from consequence-heavy changes.
  • Platform-admin surfaces should remain visually isolated from routine ops.

Queue filters

Direct filters still exist when you want a narrower slice than the saved views.

Support triage queue

Rows expose lane, age, sensitivity, status, and a safe drill-in path.

CaseLaneCategoryUrgencyStatusSensitivityCreatedAgeNext safe action
tr-72zuwbby
Transparent QA Church · Transparent Test User
Trial start | Transparent QA Church | Transparent Test User | path:self_serve
General supporttrial_startmediumsubmittedNormal admin visibilityApr 28, 10:20 PM4d oldOpen detail →

Billing and hardship review posture

Sensitive exception workflows should be visible as distinct review lanes even before mutation flows exist.

What is visible now

Billing-sensitive cases: 0

Hardship lane: 0

Billing lane: 0

What remains deliberately separate

  • Customer-visible consequence preview before changes
  • Approval and denial actions with audit linkage
  • Step-up auth for meaningful financial mutations

Escalation and assistant event review

Assistant behavior stays visible so weak grounding and sensitive topics do not disappear into polished prose.

partially grounded use caution

Grounded answer, but keep the boundary in view

How does the two-month trial work if our church may need guided migration help?

No escalation required · Apr 28, 10:20 PM

Content and trust surfaces

Public-trust promises need visible review posture even before a full approval queue exists.

Trust-surface review posture

  • Pricing, help, and support promises should remain mutually consistent.
  • EN and ES parity should stay visible for trust-sensitive content.
  • Draft, approved, and published distinctions should remain explicit later.

Reporting, audit, and system posture

Canonical metrics, evidence-first history, and privilege-sensitive references should stay distinct.

Reporting and analytics

Canonical metrics should lead. AI explanation, if it appears later, should remain visually secondary to governed reporting truth.

Audit and history

Evidence-first presentation should make actor, target, action, and result status easy to scan before any mutation tool exists.

System and access

Privilege-sensitive references should stay isolated from routine support operations and never blur into casual navigation.

Launch gate posture

The internal shell should make final readiness review explicit before any real go-live claim exists.

What the gate should inspect

  • Launch domains with attributable evidence
  • Critical-path validation with pass/fail truth
  • Blocker versus follow-up classification
  • Explicit go / hold / no-go posture

Recent audit and history

Recent evidence-first activity for queue and assistant flows.

bounded_store_saved

Target: bounded_store · tr2590-comms-workflow-store

Result: success · Actor: system · Surface: ops_chms

May 1, 7:28 PM

support_assistant_responded

Target: support_event · 841fbad0-6878-4585-b581-328934200ac9

Result: success · Actor: public_user · Surface: support_assistant

Apr 28, 10:20 PM

support_case_submitted

Target: support_case · tr-72zuwbby

Result: success · Actor: public_user · Surface: public_intake

Apr 28, 10:20 PM

High-risk action inventory

This surface stays read-heavy, but it should still make higher-consequence mutation classes explicit.

High-risk classes

  • Access or role changes
  • Hardship approval or denial
  • Billing override or exception issuance
  • Feature-flag changes affecting user-visible truth
  • Public trust-surface approvals
  • Import or correction approvals
  • Refund, dispute, or other financial-state mutations

Required mutation flow posture later

  • Pre-action context
  • Consequence statement
  • Preview or diff where meaningful
  • Explicit confirmation and audit linkage
  • Step-up auth where required

Launch-default operator guidance

The queue shell also anchors the first macro and severity map so operations stay consistent.

Severity model

S0Critical trust or platform emergency
S1Major service-impact incident
S2Blocked high-value workflow or meaningful degradation
S3Normal support issue or localized defect
S4Informational or low-impact request