System is a non-functional stub - not a real OSINT investigation tool #13
Labels
No labels
agentic-osint
audit
blocked:commit-ready-failed
blocked:gate-fetch
blocked:gate-fetch
blocked:gate-lint
blocked:gate-plan
blocked:gate-research
blocked:needs-decision
blocked:needs-human
blocked:no-changes
blocked:preflight
blocked:verify-failed
bug
chore
deferred
enhancement
feature-request
in-progress
lint-baseline
lint-cleanup
needs-decompose
needs-triage
performance
quickfix
security/medium
triage-approved
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
Mark/osint-hub#13
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Problem
Current system is a proof-of-concept stub, not a real OSINT tool.
Evidence
Root Cause
System was built as a demo/prototype without considering real OSINT requirements.
What a Real OSINT Tool Needs
This issue tracks the meta-problem that the system doesn't meet its stated purpose.
Feature Triage Assessment
Scope: large
Risk: high
Spec Alignment: misaligned
Summary: Meta-issue claiming the system is a non-functional stub running only 6 modules with an incomplete data model, but the codebase now demonstrates 75 EvidenceModule classes, a complete relational schema (Case, Person, Organization, EvidenceItem, Finding, Lead, RelationshipEdge, InvestigationRun), LLM-driven cascade investigation, and 1,671 tests.
Recommendation: Recommend closing as outdated — the original complaint is factually superseded by the current codebase. Before closing, verify referenced sub-issues (#5-#12) in Forgejo; if any remain open, reframe this issue to track only those specific residual gaps rather than the broad 'stub' claim.
Rationale: SCOPE=large: meta-issue referencing 8 sub-issues; closing or reframing it involves cross-checking all of them. RISK=high: closing could be contentious if the user still perceives gaps; the sweeping nature of the original complaint also makes a simple 'fixed' tag unreliable without verifying sub-issues. SPEC=misaligned: the spec describes 42+ modules, complete data model, and LLM-driven orchestration — the current codebase substantially implements all of those, making the core premise of the issue factually inaccurate.
Labeled
blocked:needs-decision— unblock on Forgejo to dispatch to the fixer pipeline.This issue has been decomposed into the following sub-issues:
Each sub-issue has been labeled with
needs-triageand will be evaluated by the triage pipeline before queue routing.