lorentz
20f7ec1188
1. Tasks disappearing (Mimi bug) - open tasks now always visible regardless of renewal group date; only terminal tasks filter by group age 2. Star date change recalculates task due dates - PATCH policy-group now updates dueDate on all open template tasks when renewalDate changes 3. Auto task generation on setup complete - wizard calls generate-tasks for each saved group immediately after Save & Complete 4. Manual sync date range - defaults are now dynamic (prev year to +2y) instead of hardcoded 2026-01-01 / 2026-12-31 5. Setup queue filters out clients with no active policies; shows skipped count so managers know what was excluded 6. Audit logging gap fixed - notes route now emits TASK_STATUS_CHANGED with old+new status when note submission also changes status 7. Renewal day-count warnings now shown on individual policy cards in client detail (<=30d destructive, <=90d secondary badge) 8. Client notes now show save timestamp after editing
147 lines
8.7 KiB
Markdown
147 lines
8.7 KiB
Markdown
## Key Outcomes
|
|
|
|
The meeting resolved critical issues with disappearing tasks and established a comprehensive solution for handling client renewal dates. All tasks prior to April 1, 2026 will be marked complete to clear historical backlog, and a new client-level renewal date field will be implemented to ensure consistent task generation across different renewal group configurations.
|
|
## Decisions Made
|
|
|
|
### Task Visibility and Historical Data
|
|
|
|
- **Mark all tasks before April 1, 2026 as complete** to eliminate the backlog of 599+ overdue tasks that were causing confusion across user dashboards
|
|
- **Standardize overdue task definition** across all system views (tasks page, manager page, and workload page) to mean: past the due date, not marked as N/A or completed, with no lower bound restriction
|
|
|
|
### Client Renewal Date Logic
|
|
|
|
- **Add a "Client Renewal" date field** at the client level that will be editable by managers and serve as the source of truth for client-level tasks
|
|
- **Implement automatic date suggestion logic** using the following priority: (1) default/starred group renewal date, (2) if only one group exists, use that group's date, (3) if only individual policies exist, use policy date
|
|
- **Allow manual override** of the suggested client renewal date during client setup to accommodate complex scenarios like transportation clients with multiple renewal groups
|
|
|
|
### Meeting Cadence
|
|
|
|
- **Establish weekly or bi-weekly recurring meetings** short-term to ensure system issues are addressed promptly
|
|
- **Explore adding in-app functionality** for submitting change requests or bug reports that can be quickly triaged as either bugs for immediate fixes or design issues requiring meetings
|
|
|
|
## Issues Resolved
|
|
|
|
### Disappearing Tasks Problem
|
|
|
|
- **Root cause identified**: Original 7-day visibility window was removed to address initial backlog, but this caused legitimate overdue tasks to accumulate without being hidden
|
|
- **Dashboard inconsistencies**: Task counts differed between primary dashboard and task dashboard due to three different overdue definitions being applied across different system views
|
|
- **Example case**: Mimi showed 599 past due tasks in one view but only 2 in another view
|
|
|
|
### JG Contracting Renewal Task Generation Failure
|
|
|
|
- **Problem**: Client with January 1, 2027 renewal wasn't generating expected claim review tasks in April and August 2026
|
|
- **Root cause**: System was following the June 30 renewal date of a single unassigned policy instead of the January 1 date of the main renewal group containing the bulk of policies
|
|
- **Why it happened**: System used "nearest to year start" logic (default date rule) which selected June 30 as closer to year start than January 1, applying this to client-level tasks
|
|
- **Evidence**: Client-level tasks appeared at 275 days before June 30 (September 28) and 90 days before June 30 (April 1), confirming they followed the wrong renewal date
|
|
|
|
### Group Numbering Confusion
|
|
|
|
- **Issue**: JG Contracting's single renewal group was labeled "Group 2" instead of "Group 1"
|
|
- **Explanation**: Group functionality and UI were built on different days, causing inconsistent labeling logic
|
|
|
|
## Technical Implementation Details
|
|
|
|
### Task Status Update Execution
|
|
|
|
- **Bulk update completed**: 3,292 tasks with due date before April 1, 2026 and status "not started" were marked as completed
|
|
- **Logging implemented**: Bulk changes are now logged to track why large numbers of tasks changed status
|
|
- **Potential issue identified**: Some tasks that were previously marked complete after April 1 may have been reset to "not started" - requires investigation
|
|
|
|
### Task Source Tracking
|
|
|
|
- **New icon added**: Small settings icon appears next to policies on the right side of the screen to show where tasks originated from
|
|
- **Helps debugging**: Allows users to trace which renewal date or policy group generated specific tasks
|
|
|
|
### Client Renewal Date Field Implementation
|
|
|
|
- **Location**: Will appear in the client setup screen alongside existing renewal group configuration
|
|
- **Label**: "Client Renewal" to allow future reuse for other purposes beyond just tasking
|
|
- **Behavior**: Auto-populated by logic on client creation but editable by managers at any time
|
|
- **No automatic overwriting**: Once set, the date won't change automatically unless a specific triggering action occurs
|
|
|
|
## Complex Scenarios Addressed
|
|
|
|
### Transportation Clients with Multiple Renewal Groups
|
|
|
|
- **Use case**: Clients with auto and motor truck cargo renewing 1/1, but AUCAC and truck broker liability renewing 3/1
|
|
- **Challenge**: System must allow selection of which group's renewal date should drive client-level tasks
|
|
- **Solution**: Manager can manually select the appropriate renewal date during setup, typically following the "big line" (highest premium policy)
|
|
|
|
### Single Policy vs. Multiple Groups
|
|
|
|
- **Single policy scenario**: If client has only one policy with no groups, system will use that policy's renewal date
|
|
- **Multiple groups scenario**: System will follow the starred/default group's renewal date
|
|
- **Override capability**: Regardless of automatic selection, managers can change the client renewal date if business logic dictates otherwise
|
|
|
|
## Pending Confirmation
|
|
|
|
- **Task reset investigation needed**: Verify whether tasks completed after April 1, 2026 were incorrectly reset to "not started" during the bulk update
|
|
- **Sync date range behavior**: Confirm that policy syncs only capture policies within the specified date range (e.g., a policy starting 8/1/25 expiring 8/1/26 would be missed if sync runs for 1/1/26-12/31/26)
|
|
|
|
## Technical Specifications
|
|
|
|
### Overdue Task Definition (Standardized)
|
|
|
|
- **Criteria**: Task is overdue if all of the following are true:
|
|
- Due date is before today
|
|
- Status is NOT "N/A"
|
|
- Status is NOT "Completed"
|
|
- No lower bound date restriction (perpetual visibility)
|
|
|
|
### Task Generation Logic Hierarchy
|
|
|
|
1. **Client-level tasks**: Follow the client renewal date field
|
|
2. **Group-level tasks**: Follow their specific group's renewal date
|
|
3. **Policy-level tasks**: Follow individual policy renewal dates
|
|
|
|
### Default Date Rule Logic (Pre-Fix)
|
|
|
|
- **Original behavior**: Selected renewal date nearest to start of year across all policies and groups
|
|
- **Problem**: Did not account for which policies/groups were primary or contained bulk of coverage
|
|
- **New behavior**: Will populate suggested client renewal date but allow override
|
|
|
|
## Action Items
|
|
|
|
- **Lawrence**: Implement client renewal date field in client setup screen with auto-population logic and manual override capability
|
|
- **Lawrence**: Investigate and resolve task reset issue where completed tasks after 4/1 may have been changed to "not started"
|
|
- **Lawrence**: Update sync date range to clearly indicate which policies will be captured based on effective/expiration dates
|
|
- **Luke**: Set up weekly or bi-weekly recurring meeting with Lawrence to review ongoing system issues
|
|
- **Luke**: Review task counts across all users to verify the April 1 bulk completion resolved dashboard inconsistencies
|
|
|
|
## Open Questions
|
|
|
|
### Task Visibility After Bulk Update
|
|
|
|
- Why are some tasks showing different statuses than expected after the bulk completion of pre-April 1 tasks?
|
|
- Are there any completed tasks from April 2026 onwards that were incorrectly reset?
|
|
|
|
### Sync Functionality
|
|
|
|
- Does the sync date range need to be adjusted to capture policies with effective dates before the sync year but expiration dates within it?
|
|
- Should sync default dates be modified to be more inclusive of cross-year policies?
|
|
|
|
## System Behavior Notes
|
|
|
|
### Task Page vs. Dashboard Discrepancies (Pre-Fix)
|
|
|
|
- **Tasks page**: Counted all overdue tasks with no lower bound
|
|
- **Manager page**: Used configurable overdue window (last 30 days only)
|
|
- **Workload KPI**: Counted all tasks including unassigned ones
|
|
- **Result**: Same user could see vastly different overdue counts depending on which view they accessed
|
|
|
|
### Renewal Group Star Functionality
|
|
|
|
- **Purpose**: Star indicates the default renewal group that should drive client-level task generation
|
|
- **Previous assumption**: System was following starred groups for client-level tasks
|
|
- **Actual behavior**: System was using "nearest to year start" logic instead, ignoring the star designation
|
|
|
|
### Policy Sync Date Range Default
|
|
|
|
- **Current behavior**: Sync defaults to current calendar year (1/1/26 - 12/31/26)
|
|
- **Limitation**: Policies with effective dates in previous year but expiration in current year will be missed unless date range is manually adjusted
|
|
|
|
## Next Meeting
|
|
|
|
- **Frequency**: Weekly or bi-weekly to be scheduled
|
|
- **Topics**: Continue working through system functionality issues and enhancements
|
|
- **Participants**: Luke, Lawrence, potentially Dawn and Christy as needed
|