# UX / Product Review — Job Tracker

**Companion to:** [SYSTEM_AUDIT_REPORT.md](SYSTEM_AUDIT_REPORT.md)
**Note:** grounded in code/components and `.gsd` intent; not a live usability test. Items needing real-user
validation are labelled `[Speculative issue]`.

## 1. Daily-loop navigation — good bones
`.gsd` D004 defines: **job table → follow-up/dashboard → individual job workspace**. The build honours this
(`/jobs`, `/dashboard`, `/reminders` share one workflow-signal contract, D011). This is a coherent mental
model for a job seeker's daily rhythm. Keep it.

## 2. Job creation flow
- URL import (preferred) + manual fallback both exist. ✅
- **Import-failure UX `[Design flaw — Medium]`:** when scraping fails or returns junk (the common case for
  LinkedIn/Indeed), the recovery path is a silent drop to manual entry. Users won't know *why* it failed or
  that the manual fields are now their job. Needs an explicit "we couldn't read that page — here's what we
  got, fill the rest" state that pre-fills whatever parsed.
- Quick-capture (bookmarklet + PWA share-target, M1/M2) is a genuinely nice friction-reducer. ✅

## 3. CV regeneration UX
- Tailored-CV workspace persists reusable package material (D006). Good.
- **Historical smell `[Design flaw]`:** the saved application-answer draft was shoehorned into the free-text
  `notes` block (D006) because no dedicated field existed; repeated saves duplicated content until a
  "replaceable notes block" workaround landed. This is UX built around a schema gap — fix the schema
  (dedicated field), retire the workaround.
- **No "why this score" `[Speculative issue — Medium]`:** the match score is a number with a card, but the
  deterministic keyword basis isn't surfaced as "matched: React, Azure / missing: Kubernetes". Showing the
  gap turns a vanity number into an actionable to-do (add these keywords / this is a stretch role).

## 4. Cover-letter workflow
Manual / upload / AI-generated, returned as draft (assistive-only, D002). Consistent and safe. Ensure the
three entry points converge on one editable draft surface (avoid three divergent UIs).

## 5. Dashboard clarity
Time-in-stage card + funnel via canonical `JobPipeline` (H3). Solid analytics for a personal tool. Risk:
funnel/analytics load-all-then-count server-side today (perf, not UX) — invisible to users until data grows.

## 6. Timeline usability
`JobEvent` history drives status/stage transitions; correspondence continuity shows linked-thread refresh
state in the workspace (D012). Good trust surface. `[Speculative issue]`: verify the timeline reads as a
single chronological story (events + emails interleaved), not two separate lists.

## 7. Cross-cutting UX risks
| Item | Sev | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Import failure feels like a dead end | Medium | pre-fill + explain, don't silently drop to manual |
| Match score without gap breakdown | Medium | show matched/missing keywords |
| Notes-block overloading | Low (mitigated) | fix schema, retire workaround |
| Attachment checklist can lie | High (data) | booleans drift from real attachments (see data review) |
| No visible AI-fabrication guardrail | Medium | show "AI added X — confirm" in CV review |

## 8. Product-identity question (drives UX direction)
Is this a **personal tool** (D003) or a **multi-tenant SaaS**? The UX for onboarding, empty states,
sharing, and billing diverge sharply. This is the single biggest unanswered product question and should be
decided before the next UX investment (see [REMASTER_PROPOSAL.md](REMASTER_PROPOSAL.md) §1).