Run the performance audit on one key route and land its top finding
An audit run once against a real route, with its highest-impact finding actually fixed.
The ticket
Run the performance audit against one route and fix its highest-impact finding.
Acceptance criteria
- The audit output is attached before and after
- The top finding by impact is fixed
- The score improvement is measured on the same conditions
- Remaining findings are listed for follow-up tickets
What lands as proof
Two audit runs under identical conditions, so the improvement is attributable rather than incidental.
Why teams defer it
- The audit produces a long list, and a list is not a ticket until somebody picks from it.
- Scores move with network conditions, so proving an improvement needs controlled runs.
Questions
- What does the agent actually change?
- The ticket is scoped to one outcome: run the performance audit against one route and fix its highest-impact finding. Work that serves that outcome is in scope, and anything outside it is left for a separate ticket, so the pull request stays reviewable.
- How do I know the work is done?
- The pull request carries the evidence, not only the diff. Here that means score before and after, with the audit output attached, so a reviewer can confirm the result without reproducing the work locally.
- How much oversight does this need?
- None is required before the run starts. Every claim this ticket makes can be checked by machine, so the agent works straight through and a person reviews the finished pull request like any other.