Working with Evidence
Devplan connects findings to source material so you can inspect the basis for an answer, insight, proposal, or project assessment. Those references help you explain a recommendation to colleagues and return to the original context when a decision needs closer review.
Inspect a reference
Open a source reference to see the available context and follow its original link where provided. Check what the source says, when it was recorded, and whether it actually supports the conclusion you are considering.
Some references lead to Devplan's own summaries, such as a signal or code change. Follow their supporting sources when exact wording or implementation details matter. Access to an original source may require an account in that service.
Distinguish evidence from conclusions
| What you see | How to interpret it |
|---|---|
| Original message, ticket, document, or code artifact | Source material to inspect in its context |
| Signal or change summary | Devplan's synthesis of source material |
| Insight, proposal, or project assessment | An interpretation to evaluate against its evidence |
| Missing or unavailable evidence | Not enough information to verify the conclusion |
Several references can trace back to the same event. A large source count does not necessarily mean many independent customers or confirmations.
Check freshness and delivery
A source date, processing date, and report-generation date describe different things. Check the period covered before assuming a finding reflects today's state.
For delivery questions, distinguish planned, implemented, merged, deployed, and enabled behavior. A completed project or merged pull request alone does not establish that every customer can use a feature.
Resolve a mismatch
Ask Weaver what evidence supports the conclusion and what remains uncertain. Correct inaccurate workspace context or use the available feedback controls for the finding. For important decisions, verify the original source rather than treating an AI-generated summary as definitive.