Onboarding Comprehension and Guided Walkthrough Report

Status

Current implementation report for IARPG-OPS-2 2.0.11-wip. The navigation, first-click routing, deterministic onboarding proxy, public evidence boundary, and three optional browser-local walkthroughs are implemented and locally testable. No representative human participants were recruited or observed during this round. The release therefore remains work in progress and must not claim measured visitor comprehension, confidence, or real-world task success.

Purpose

Continue the 2.0.10 site-identity and onboarding clarity work by reducing remaining first-click ambiguity and giving visitors optional help inside the three densest workbenches. This report records what changed, why it changed, what automated evidence can establish, what it cannot establish, and the moderated study that remains necessary.

Scope

This round covers:

• the primary navigation labels and first-click destinations;
• homepage and Start Here routes into the game concept;
• the distinction between the fictional player loop and the publication toolchain;
• the Mission Workbench, Operation Package Workspace, and Operations Simulator;
• a shared accessible walkthrough component and browser-local runtime;
• a deterministic onboarding task-routing validator;
• a public onboarding-evidence page and matching FAQ answer;
• search, sitemap, answer catalog, feed, manifests, checksums, UAI memory, release metadata, and validation evidence.

This round does not establish that unfamiliar visitors understand IARPG, select the intended first click, complete a workbench task, prefer the new labels, or benefit from the walkthroughs. It also does not replace unrestricted navigated browser testing, native Firefox, native assistive-technology speech output, production-edge evidence, field performance, or host-owned search and crawler evidence.

Executive Summary

The 2.0.10 release made the site’s identity explicit, but two primary-navigation labels still carried avoidable ambiguity. Game could be read as a link to a live game client even though the current publication is a game concept and design system. Create did not say what the visitor would create. The 2.0.11 navigation therefore uses Game Concept and Create Missions. The first game-oriented path now opens /how-to-play, which explains the proposed player loop and clearly states that it is not a tutorial for a currently live persistent game. Operations doctrine remains available as supporting depth rather than the first conceptual destination.

The repository cannot honestly conduct a moderated human study without participants. Instead of inventing participant results, this round adds a deterministic task-routing proxy. It verifies that the required answers, labels, direct destinations, route responses, toolchain links, research routes, and walkthrough surfaces exist in rendered output. The generated evidence explicitly records humanparticipants: 0, moderatedhumanstudystatus: not-run, and a truth boundary stating that the checks do not measure comprehension or behavior.

Three dense tools now provide manually launched five-step walkthroughs. The tours point to existing controls, explain the local workflow, and never gate the tool. They do not load examples, alter drafts, save data, upload files, or transmit information. Completion state is optional browser-local metadata. A blocked storage layer leaves the tour usable without claiming completion. The tours support keyboard dismissal, focus restoration, reduced motion, reduced transparency, forced colors, mobile containment, high zoom, print suppression, and offline use. The centered .menu-strip remains the only sticky surface.

Evidence Reviewed

The round reviewed the following repository evidence:

• the 2.0.10 homepage, /start, /how-to-play, shared centered menu, publication orientation bar, overflow menu, footer, FAQ, and answer catalog;
• the 20-stage Mission Workbench in build.php;
• the 14-component Operation Package Workspace in package.php;
• the role, phase, decision, meter, and event-log surfaces in simulate.php;
• the current conditional script loader and shared security/content shell in app/layout.php;
• the existing local-storage migration boundaries in assets/js/site.js and assets/js/lifecycle.js;
• prior site-identity, browser, accessibility, production-edge, staging-host, and delivery evidence;
• the current release-promotion matrix and its unresolved human-comprehension, native-browser, assistive-technology, host, field-performance, and live-discovery gates;
• active hot-memory records and the durable split-memory rules.

The automated proxy models the questions requested by the 2.0.11 assignment:

1. What is IARPG?
2. What is available now?
3. What is not yet shipped?
4. Where should a first-time visitor begin?
5. How does the player loop differ from the publication toolchain?
6. Which route opens a complete mission?
7. Which tools create, simulate, verify, merge, and publish a package?
8. Where do the international methodology and research evidence live?

Findings

Navigation labels and first-click destinations

The previous labels were concise but not maximally explicit for an unfamiliar visitor:

• Game could imply a currently playable persistent product.
• Create omitted the object of the action.
• The game-oriented first click previously emphasized operations doctrine, which is useful but denser than the proposed player-loop guide.

The current primary navigation is:

Start Here → Game Concept → Missions → Create Missions → Standards → Research

This preserves a compact centered menu while making product state and task intent visible. /how-to-play is the first conceptual destination. /operations remains a doctrine page available through the overflow menu, homepage depth links, search, and supporting guidance.

Deterministic task-routing proxy

scripts/validateonboardingtasks.py is a local-only, rendered-page validator. It checks identity and release truth, first-click routes, representative audience paths, toolchain destinations, international methodology and archive access, walkthrough markup, progressive-enhancement safeguards, and absence of walkthrough network APIs.

The report it generates is intentionally explicit about its evidentiary limit:

• evaluation type: deterministic onboarding task-routing proxy;
• human participants: 0;
• moderated human study: not run;
• result scope: published copy, labels, routes, HTTP availability, and implementation;
• excluded claims: comprehension, confidence, task success, preference, and participant behavior.

The public /onboarding-evidence page renders the same boundary, publishes the individual checks, and lists the questions a future participant must answer without coaching. The Answer Center contains a matching direct answer to “Has IARPG been tested with real first-time visitors?”

Mission Workbench walkthrough

The Mission Workbench contains 20 sequential stages plus continuous conformance review, example loading, local save/export controls, and generated JSON. Static orientation remains present, but the density justifies optional in-context help.

Its five walkthrough steps point to:

1. the example loader and local action toolbar;
2. the 20-stage progress rail;
3. the active mission field editor;
4. the continuous conformance review;
5. local save, export, and print controls.

The tour explains sequence and output without filling, submitting, or mutating any field.

Operation Package walkthrough

The package workspace combines fixture loading, local import, fourteen components, component-specific editors, findings, cross-component constraints, and downstream review tools. Its five walkthrough steps point to:

1. fixture and import controls;
2. component navigation;
3. the active component editor;
4. package findings and missing requirements;
5. connected verification, merge, replay, review, migration, and publication routes.

The walkthrough explains assembly order but does not load a fixture, import a file, or change the package.

Operations Simulator walkthrough

The simulator presents mission and role configuration, an eight-state phase track, decision controls, live meters, and an event log. Its five walkthrough steps point to:

1. mission and role setup;
2. the Task-to-Debrief state track;
3. the current decision panel;
4. evidence, cover, heat, and trust meters;
5. the event log and export path.

The tour does not start or reset a simulation and cannot generate a simulation record.

Shared walkthrough behavior

renderguidedwalkthrough() in app/layout.php supplies one consistent semantic structure. assets/js/walkthrough.js provides progressive enhancement. Each walkthrough is:

• manually launched and never auto-opened;
• dismissible by its close button, Exit Tour, backdrop, or Escape;
• restartable from the same page;
• keyboard operable with focus moved to the current step and returned to the launcher after close;
• non-blocking, with direct expert access preserved;
• inert with respect to mission, evidence, simulation, and package data;
• browser-local, with no fetch, XMLHttpRequest, WebSocket, or sendBeacon use;
• usable when local storage is blocked;
• sensitive to reduced-motion preference;
• styled for reduced transparency, forced colors, narrow viewports, high zoom, dark theme, print, and offline operation;
• implemented without adding any sticky surface.

Evidence and privacy boundary

No remote analytics, account requirement, participant identity collection, session replay, voice recording, IP logging, or third-party runtime dependency was added. The proposed moderated study instructs operators to retain only anonymized task outcomes: task success, first click, completion route, hesitation category, and an optional confidence rating. Names, emails, credentials, account identifiers, recordings, IP addresses, and sensitive session data are outside the study record.

Decisions or Recommendations

1. Keep Game Concept and Create Missions as the primary labels unless real participant evidence shows a clearer alternative.
2. Keep /how-to-play as the first game-concept route and /operations as supporting doctrine.
3. Keep walkthroughs optional and limited to the three dense workbenches. Do not expand tutorial overlays across ordinary content pages without evidence of a concrete task failure.
4. Never describe deterministic routing checks as user research, usability testing, participant evidence, or comprehension proof.
5. Run the future moderated study with unfamiliar participants across the intended audiences. Ask the eight published questions without coaching, then give one representative workbench task.
6. Record only anonymized outcomes and do not package participant-sensitive data.
7. Correct terminology or information architecture before adding more instructional copy when first-click evidence shows a route-selection problem.
8. Preserve WIP status until the human-comprehension gate and the remaining native, host, field-performance, and live-discovery gates have direct evidence.

Risks and Limitations

• Automated checks can confirm that a label or route exists but cannot establish whether a person notices or interprets it as intended.
• The walkthroughs may reduce uncertainty for some visitors while adding visual or cognitive load for others; only participant observation can resolve that trade-off.
• Headless Chromium fixture checks do not establish behavior in native Firefox or with a native screen reader.
• Browser-local completion state is a convenience, not a learning record, account record, or analytics event.
• A blocked persistence layer intentionally prevents completion state from surviving; the tour itself should remain usable.
• The current English-language copy has not been tested for comprehension across languages, regions, literacy levels, disability contexts, or cultural expectations.
• This round does not establish production-host caching, proxy, CDN, field-performance, indexing, ranking, crawler, or generative-citation outcomes.

Validation Performed

The release validation contract includes:

• PHP lint for every PHP file;
• JavaScript syntax checks for all shared scripts, including walkthrough.js;
• Python compilation for the onboarding, identity, browser, accessibility, discoverability, staging, production-edge, performance, and memory validators;
• deterministic onboarding task-routing checks against rendered clean routes;
• browser-fixture checks for tour launch, non-auto-open behavior, step progression, back navigation, Escape dismissal, focus return, completion state, draft non-mutation, zero network calls, narrow viewport containment, reduced motion, and blocked storage;
• structural accessibility checks over canonical HTML routes;
• one-sticky-surface checks at required viewport widths and high zoom;
• sitemap, search, answer-catalog, FAQ, schema, feed, manifest, checksum, pointer-ledger, and UAI mirror regeneration;
• memory link, heading-anchor, checksum, report-placement, backlink, and common-secret-pattern validation;
• flat archive integrity, no nested archive, external SHA-256, and fresh-extraction comparison.

Final counts and outcomes are published in the release validation artifacts. Any failed or unavailable gate remains reported as failed or not tested rather than inferred from adjacent evidence.

Memory References

• Progress
• Active decisions
• Architecture
• Test plan
• UI shell
• Mission Workbench
• Operation packages
• Simulation
• Browser validation
• Accessibility
• Release promotion

Related Durable Documents

• [Site Identity and Onboarding Clarity Report](site-identity-and-onboarding-clarity-report.md#executive-summary)
• [Production-Edge, Security, and Accessibility Validation Report](production-edge-security-and-accessibility-validation-report.md#validation-performed)
• [Staging-Host and Runtime Validation Report](staging-host-and-runtime-validation-report.md#validation-performed)
• [UI/UX, SEO, AEO, and GEO Improvement Report](ui-ux-seo-aeo-geo-improvement-report.md#validation-performed)
• Split-Memory Architecture

Supersession Status

Current until a later implementation report supersedes the 2.0.11-wip onboarding task-routing, navigation-label, or guided-walkthrough decisions. This report augments rather than replaces the 2.0.10 site-identity report.