Claims denied showed Ava's affected_claims (225) while "See the claims"
opened 237 rows — her quantify query and the link's filters are two
different queries. The tile now asks the record view for the link's own
filter set (limit 1, pagination.total_count) and shows that; her figure
appears underneath only when it disagrees. The URL→filter mapping moves
to lib/claimsLink so the table and the tile share one definition.
While a review runs the trace is the page: the layout widens to the
screen, the list takes the viewport height, follows the newest step
unless the viewer scrolled up, and shows a working row with a spinner
and an indeterminate strip under the header. Reduced motion honoured.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Rebuilt the two screens for a person with ninety seconds, not an analyst.
Every screen now answers, in order and at descending size: what happened
(one sentence, 21px), how much (three numbers you can read across a
table — claims denied, money at stake, still recoverable with its first
deadline), and what she wants approved (the ranked list, with the decision
buttons directly under it). The full analysis, her SQL and the live trace
sit behind disclosures — one click for the reviewer who wants to check,
zero clutter for the manager who does not.
The queue opens on a briefing strip: "1 decision waiting for you —
$1,091,000 recoverable". A manager who reads only that line has the day.
Cards lead with the verdict sentence and the recoverable figure; a waiting
case says "Needs your decision", not "Awaiting Review".
Jargon translated where a business reader meets it: "data reconciled"
became "Numbers checked against Finance"; "97% confident" became "Ava is
97% sure"; the trace steps read "Asked the data" and "Thought about it".
Ava's SHOUTED recommendation headings are sentence-cased.
While Ava is still working, the trace is the page — there is nothing else
to show yet, and watching her query is the demo.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The operator console for Northlake Health's Denials Investigator (dev, org
900000109 / app 900000102). A revenue-cycle manager asks why claim denials
rose; Ava — an AI employee — investigates the hospital's Databricks lakehouse
and comes back with a cause, a dollar figure and a recommendation. He approves,
and she re-checks on her own two minutes later.
THE POINT OF THE SCREEN is that her work is checkable. Anyone can be told an
agent analysed their denials; AvaLive shows the actual SQL she sent to
Databricks, in order, with what came back and how long each query took — and it
does NOT hide a query she got wrong and corrected, because that is the most
convincing thing on the page.
Two decisions worth knowing about:
* Her trace does not come from the AI-employee monitor API. That endpoint needs
an org-scoped studio token and answers "no organization scope on this
account" for every user of this console. It comes instead from two views
(northlake_app.ava_trace / ava_decisions) exposed as ordinary rdbms record
views, behind a login role that cannot read the aiemployee schema at all.
Seeded by sm2/custom-apps/denials-investigator/07_console_views.sql.
* Ava's own activities — Record Findings, Confirm Recovery, Flag Still
Elevated, Escalate — are deliberately absent from STAGE_ACTIONS. Putting them
on screen would only let a person sign in as the agent and press its button,
which is a person impersonating an agent rather than an agent working.
Violet is the AI and nothing else is violet; amber is the one queue a human
owns. No API URL is compiled in — config.js carries it at placement time.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
