Filed unassigned as a finding — recording only, ⛔ not graded, no domain:*, no repo:* set. ⚠️ This almost certainly belongs in objectstack-ai/objectui, not here (see routing below); it is filed in this repo because the measuring dev was fenced out of objectui by its dispatch and routed it to the PM rather than minting a cross-repo card unasked — which was the right call. Handing it to triage, which owns routing and transfer across the five repos.
What was observed
Measured in a real console at objectui pin 190fbd01d during the #9167 measurement round (2026-08-23, full evidence on that card).
On every record-detail page load carrying a bare-string page-block predicate — including the ordinary, correct ones — the console logs an evaluation failure for the loading frame:
Failed to evaluate expression: ${record.status == 'in_review'}
Error: ... record is not defined
Observed on A1 (banner correctly shown), A2 (banner correctly hidden), and B1/B2 alike. So it is emitted in every polarity, on pages where the predicate demonstrably works.
Why it is worth a card rather than a shrug
It is not a symptom of anything being wrong — and that is exactly the problem. An author debugging a page-block predicate sees record is not defined on a page where the predicate is functioning correctly. The diagnostic is permanently misleading on the happy path: it invites a fix for a non-defect, and it trains readers to ignore a message that would be genuinely important if it ever appeared for a real reason.
That last part is the durable cost. This platform's whole strategy on predicate faults is to make them loud — the same #9167 round measured the CEL face naming its missing key ([runtime] No such key: status), which is precisely the behaviour you want. A warning that cries wolf on every load degrades that channel.
Why it is not a #9167 defect
#9167's two predicates evaluate correctly at this pin in every polarity tested (todo → hidden, in_review → visible, verified user → hidden, unverified self → visible). This warning fires alongside all four. It is about the loading frame of the evaluator, not about the predicates' verdicts, so it neither blocks nor is fixed by that card's migration.
Routing
Rule 1 of multi-repo coordination — 正文抽掉 objectstack 还成立 ⇒ file-at-destination: strip objectstack from this description and it still stands. The evaluator and renderer that log it are in objectui at the pinned SHA (record-alert.tsx / predicateInput.ts were read there, for explanation only, never as evidence). So this looks like a file-at-destination transfer to objectui, not a seam card.
⛔ I have not transferred it myself: routing is the triage seat's single-producer responsibility, and the repo:objectui seat is currently vacant (#6025), so a card dropped there unannounced would sit unattended. Recording it here with the destination named is the honest handoff.
⚠️ One note for whoever picks it up: the #9167 round also measured that all 6 authored visibleWhen values served across 34 pages are {dialect:'cel'} envelopes and 0 are bare, while the only 2 record:alert blocks in existence carry visible as bare strings. So the bare-string path this warning fires on is a small and shrinking surface — which bounds the fix's value, and is worth knowing before anyone sizes it.
Filed unassigned as a⚠️ This almost certainly belongs in
finding— recording only, ⛔ not graded, nodomain:*, norepo:*set.objectstack-ai/objectui, not here (see routing below); it is filed in this repo because the measuring dev was fenced out of objectui by its dispatch and routed it to the PM rather than minting a cross-repo card unasked — which was the right call. Handing it to triage, which owns routing and transfer across the five repos.What was observed
Measured in a real console at objectui pin
190fbd01dduring the #9167 measurement round (2026-08-23, full evidence on that card).On every record-detail page load carrying a bare-string page-block predicate — including the ordinary, correct ones — the console logs an evaluation failure for the loading frame:
Observed on A1 (banner correctly shown), A2 (banner correctly hidden), and B1/B2 alike. So it is emitted in every polarity, on pages where the predicate demonstrably works.
Why it is worth a card rather than a shrug
It is not a symptom of anything being wrong — and that is exactly the problem. An author debugging a page-block predicate sees
record is not definedon a page where the predicate is functioning correctly. The diagnostic is permanently misleading on the happy path: it invites a fix for a non-defect, and it trains readers to ignore a message that would be genuinely important if it ever appeared for a real reason.That last part is the durable cost. This platform's whole strategy on predicate faults is to make them loud — the same #9167 round measured the CEL face naming its missing key (
[runtime] No such key: status), which is precisely the behaviour you want. A warning that cries wolf on every load degrades that channel.Why it is not a #9167 defect
#9167's two predicates evaluate correctly at this pin in every polarity tested (
todo→ hidden,in_review→ visible, verified user → hidden, unverified self → visible). This warning fires alongside all four. It is about the loading frame of the evaluator, not about the predicates' verdicts, so it neither blocks nor is fixed by that card's migration.Routing
Rule 1 of multi-repo coordination — 正文抽掉 objectstack 还成立 ⇒ file-at-destination: strip objectstack from this description and it still stands. The evaluator and renderer that log it are in objectui at the pinned SHA (
record-alert.tsx/predicateInput.tswere read there, for explanation only, never as evidence). So this looks like a file-at-destination transfer to objectui, not a seam card.⛔ I have not transferred it myself: routing is the triage seat's single-producer responsibility, and the
repo:objectuiseat is currently vacant (#6025), so a card dropped there unannounced would sit unattended. Recording it here with the destination named is the honest handoff.visibleWhenvalues served across 34 pages are{dialect:'cel'}envelopes and 0 are bare, while the only 2record:alertblocks in existence carryvisibleas bare strings. So the bare-string path this warning fires on is a small and shrinking surface — which bounds the fix's value, and is worth knowing before anyone sizes it.