What a path contains
Each path should expose the right material for a strong review decision:- who the connector is
- how strong the relationship looks
- what evidence supports the route
- where the weak link is
- what likely happens next if you proceed
- what fallback paths exist if the strongest route is not appropriate
Review checklist
| Look for | Why |
|---|---|
| Connector identity | Someone specific has to make the ask |
| Confidence score | Low confidence should slow the user down |
| Evidence chips | Proof that the route is not fabricated |
| Weak or stale edges | The likely failure point in the route |
| Mutual count and source evidence | Extra context for why the route exists |
| Intro preview | Whether the generated ask is specific enough |
| What happens next | Whether the user understands the approval and handoff flow |
Move forward only when the explanation is clear
A good path review page should make it obvious:- why this connector is the best choice
- what proof supports the recommendation
- whether the relationship is fresh enough to use
- whether a fallback connector exists if the first route is weak
Decision rule
If the explanation is thin, stale, or ambiguous, do not push the user into a request. Instead:- gather more relationship evidence
- choose a different connector
- warm the route first