Note
When a prototype should stay a prototype
A prototype is useful when it clarifies what still has not been proven.
Some work should remain labeled as proof record, product study, evaluation lab, or in progress until source, user, reliability, and product boundaries are sharper.
Context
Early systems can be valuable without deserving product language. The risk is turning a working path, notebook, demo, or route into a claim about customers, operations, or maturity that has not been earned.
Observation
Senthira, Nava, and the MLOps record each carry a different boundary: paused product scope, prototype interface framing, and proof-scoped ML. Those labels are not disclaimers; they are part of the proof.
What this changes
The discipline is to keep the public promise smaller than the artifact: show what was explored, what it proves, what it does not prove, and what would need review before shipping.
Open question
What exact evidence would let this move from prototype or proof-scoped record to a product claim without inflating the work?
