Phase 0 Evidence Matrix - Frontend Investigation
Date: September 17, 2025
Time: 10:11 AM PDT
Agent: Cursor Agent
Issue: #172 CORE-UI Layer 3 Intent Processing Pipeline
Phase: 0 Complete → 1 Starting
Browser Testing Results Summary
Test Execution Details
- Environment: http://localhost:8001
- Framework:
web/browser_test_script.js
- Execution Time: 2025-09-17T16:47:16.530Z
- Method: Manual browser console testing with network monitoring
Differential Analysis Matrix
| Prompt |
Category |
Status |
Response Time |
Network Status |
Error Message |
UI Behavior |
| “hello” |
Simple Greeting |
✅ Works |
25.7ms |
200 OK |
None |
Immediate response |
| “good morning” |
Simple Greeting |
✅ Works |
3.1ms |
200 OK |
None |
Immediate response |
| “help” |
Complex Command |
❌ Fails |
2704.6ms |
500 Error |
“Failed to process intent” |
Error display |
| “show standup” |
Complex Command |
❌ Fails |
3595.4ms |
500 Error |
“Failed to process intent” |
Error display |
| “fixing bugs” |
Complex Command |
❌ Fails |
3144.6ms |
500 Error |
“Failed to process intent” |
Error display |
Critical Insights
1. Clear Boundary Pattern
- Working: Simple 1-2 word greetings
- Failing: Multi-word commands requiring intent processing
- Boundary: Conversation vs Command intent categories
2. Error Consistency
- All failing prompts: Identical “Failed to process intent” message
- Source: Layer 3 intent processing pipeline failure
- Frontend: Correctly handling backend 500 errors
3. Response Timing Patterns
- Working prompts: <30ms (immediate)
- Failing prompts: 2.7-3.6s (processing attempt before failure)
- No timeouts: All requests complete (no hanging)
4. Network Request Analysis
- API Endpoint: POST
/api/v1/intent
- Request Format:
{"message": "prompt", "session_id": null}
- Working Response: Direct conversation response
- Failing Response: 500 Internal Server Error
Frontend vs Backend Responsibility
Frontend (Working Correctly) ✅
- Error Handling: Proper display of backend error messages
- Network Requests: Correctly formatted API calls
- UI State Management: No hanging, proper error display
- User Experience: Clear error feedback (not silent failures)
Backend (Layer 3 Failure) ❌
- Intent Processing: Complex prompts failing in pipeline
- Error Response: Generic “Failed to process intent” message
- Processing Time: 2.7-3.6s before failure (indicates processing attempt)
- Status Codes: 500 Internal Server Error (not timeout)
Console Error Patterns
Working Prompts
🌐 Network Request: POST /api/v1/intent
✅ Network Response: {status: 200, timing: <30ms}
Direct response: "Hi there! How can I assist..."
Failing Prompts
🌐 Network Request: POST /api/v1/intent
POST http://localhost:8001/api/v1/intent 500 (Internal Server Error)
✅ Network Response: {status: 500, timing: 2700-3600ms}
Error response: "Failed to process intent"
User Experience Impact
Current UX for Failures
- Error Display: ✅ Clear error messages shown
- Response Time: ❌ 2.7-3.6s delay before error
- User Feedback: ❌ Generic “Failed to process intent” message
- Retry Guidance: ❌ No suggestions for working alternatives
UX Requirements for Fix
- Faster Failures: Reduce 2.7-3.6s processing time for known failures
- Better Error Messages: Specific guidance instead of generic failure
- Fallback Options: Suggest working alternatives
- Progressive Enhancement: Handle complex prompts gracefully
Phase 1 Correlation Requirements
For Code Agent Validation
- Pipeline Gap Analysis: Which Layer 3 components fail for complex prompts?
- Intent Category Mapping: How do failing prompts map to IntentCategory enum?
- Processing Flow: Where in the 2.7-3.6s processing does failure occur?
- Error Generation: What backend component generates “Failed to process intent”?
Edge Case Testing Needs
- Boundary Testing: Prompts between simple/complex categories
- Intent Category Testing: Specific prompts for each IntentCategory
- Length Testing: Character/word count impact on success/failure
- Complexity Gradients: Incremental complexity to find exact boundary
Phase 0 Deliverables Status ✅
Ready for Phase 1: Pipeline validation and edge case testing