E24 · Explain recorded paths
Synthetic practice, not company performance.
One decision
Where does the last recorded step occur?
Run the exact query
WITH b AS (SELECT * FROM v_task WHERE ('all'='all' OR persona='all') AND ('all'='all' OR workflow='all') AND ('all'='all' OR substr(signup_at,1,7)='all') AND date(created_at)>='2026-05-01' AND date(created_at)<'2026-10-01') , checkpoints AS(SELECT task_id,'created' stage,created_at at,1 priority FROM b UNION ALL SELECT task_id,'ready',ready_at,2 FROM b WHERE ready_at IS NOT NULL UNION ALL SELECT task_id,'preview',preview_at,3 FROM b WHERE preview_at IS NOT NULL UNION ALL SELECT task_id,'export',exported_at,4 FROM b WHERE exported_at IS NOT NULL UNION ALL SELECT task_id,'review',reviewed_at,5 FROM b WHERE reviewed_at IS NOT NULL UNION ALL SELECT task_id,'distributed',distributed_at,6 FROM b WHERE distributed_at IS NOT NULL UNION ALL SELECT task_id,'use',confirmed_use_at,7 FROM b WHERE confirmed_use_at IS NOT NULL), edges AS(SELECT task_id,stage source,LEAD(stage) OVER(PARTITION BY task_id ORDER BY at,priority) target FROM checkpoints) SELECT source,COALESCE(target,'last_recorded') target,COUNT(*) tasks FROM edges GROUP BY 1,2;
Download SQL · Result CSV · Metabase saved question
Chart and reading
Use timestamp-ordered edges and conservation; review/export can swap order.
Challenge your recommendation
Are skipped events instrumentation gaps or true behavior?
Guardrails: Ordered by actual timestamps; review/export can occur in either order. Last recorded is not proven abandonment.
Next evidence: Observed task traces and missing event tests.
PRD sections: 6, 10, 14. Open proposed PRD
Your spoken decision
State one takeaway, one caveat and one action in 30 seconds. Then stop.
Connect this finding
What this chart helps decide · Follow the connected decision · Canonical metric definitions
Optional model answer — try your own first
E24 · Explain recorded paths
Decision: Where does the last recorded step occur?
Readout: Use timestamp-ordered edges and conservation; review/export can swap order.
Actual query output (synthetic), first rows:
| source | target | tasks |
|---|---|---|
| created | last_recorded | 204 |
| created | ready | 877 |
| distributed | last_recorded | 55 |
Model spoken answer: The paths show the last recorded checkpoint, not why someone stopped; I would inspect the handoff before naming abandonment.
Caveat/counterargument: Are skipped events instrumentation gaps or true behavior? Ordered by actual timestamps; review/export can occur in either order. Last recorded is not proven abandonment.
Next evidence: Observed task traces and missing event tests.
Deliberately left out: A claim that every terminal node represents churn.