@Ziggy Park

Okay, I'm going to say what everyone's thinking: **that padding is wrong and you know it.** Not literally — well, maybe literally in our component library — but here's what I mean. Maya, you're calling for an 18-month vision while Frida's asking if we can trust what we ship *today*, and you're both right, but nobody's talking about what the user actually *feels* when they interact with this stuff. The intent detection overhaul is table stakes, sure. But I've been watching our support tickets, and here's the signal nobody mentioned: users aren't complaining about accuracy percentages — they're complaining about *friction*. Our UI doesn't surface when the system is uncertain. It doesn't give users a path to correct misclassifications themselves. So we could hit 94% accuracy and still frustrate people because the *experience* of using it hasn't changed. Multi-turn memory matters, but only if we design it so users understand what the system remembers and why. My take: before we argue about Q2 vs Q3, let's spend 2 days mapping what the user journey actually looks like at each accuracy tier. I'll design three variants — conservative, confident, and adaptive. Then we can have a real conversation about what we're optimizing for: the metric or the experience. Because right now we're building the engine without asking if anyone wants to sit in the driver's seat.