---
artifact_type: meeting-synthesis
version: 1.0
generated_at: 2026-04-02T10:00:00Z
generated_by_skill: foundation-meeting-synthesize

project: search-feature
topics:
  - scope
  - capacity
  - vendor

time_range:
  start: 2026-01-15
  end: 2026-03-31

scope_filter: "project=search-feature"

source_meetings:
  - 2026-01-15_14-00EST_search-scope-kickoff_recap.md
  - 2026-02-05_14-00EST_search-scope-review_recap.md
  - 2026-02-19_14-00EST_search-capacity-planning_recap.md
  - 2026-03-12_14-00EST_search-capacity-decision_recap.md
  - 2026-03-26_14-00EST_search-vendor-risk-review_recap.md

input_quality: high
confidence: high
visibility: team
status: draft
---

# Meeting synthesis: Search Feature (Q1 2026)

## Shareable summary

**Synthesis scope**: Search feature across 5 meetings, 2026-01-15 to 2026-03-31

Q1 converged on a scope-and-capacity decision (autocomplete + filters; 8 sprint-weeks for Q2) but surfaced a late-breaking vendor-licensing concern that now blocks a ship-date commitment. Stakeholder positions evolved from skeptical-of-scope to aligned-on-scope; the vendor question is the one unresolved thread.

**Key themes**:
- Scope discipline held across 3 scope-test moments (autocomplete + filters consistently in; saved searches consistently out)
- Engineering capacity concern resolved via explicit model (alex's capacity model emerged in Feb; referenced in all subsequent meetings)
- Vendor-licensing risk emerged late (Mar 26); not present in earlier meetings

**Top open items**:
- Algolia licensing terms review (maria): blocks Q2 ship-date commitment

**Top priority follow-ups**:
- [High] Schedule vendor-licensing resolution meeting within 2 weeks; currently blocks timeline
- [High] Document the capacity model as reusable artifact; referenced 4 times across the 5 meetings

---

## Full synthesis

### Scope

- **Topic or initiative**: Search feature for Q2 2026 ship
- **Time range**: 2026-01-15 to 2026-03-31
- **Meetings included** (5):
  - 2026-01-15: Search Scope Kickoff (2026-01-15_14-00EST_search-scope-kickoff_recap.md) [input quality: high]
  - 2026-02-05: Search Scope Review (2026-02-05_14-00EST_search-scope-review_recap.md) [input quality: high]
  - 2026-02-19: Search Capacity Planning (2026-02-19_14-00EST_search-capacity-planning_recap.md) [input quality: medium]
  - 2026-03-12: Search Capacity Decision (2026-03-12_14-00EST_search-capacity-decision_recap.md) [input quality: high]
  - 2026-03-26: Search Vendor Risk Review (2026-03-26_14-00EST_search-vendor-risk-review_recap.md) [input quality: high]
- **Scope filter applied**: project=search-feature
- **Sources used**: 5 recaps (all structured)

### Timeline

```
2026-01-15  |  Search Scope Kickoff
            |  → Initial scope proposal: autocomplete + filters + saved searches
            |  [confidence: high. kickoff consensus]
            |
2026-02-05  |  Search Scope Review
            |  → Scope narrowed: saved searches deferred to v2
            |  [!] scope tightened from kickoff; maria supported, priya-cfo skeptical of Q2 feasibility even after narrowing
            |
2026-02-19  |  Search Capacity Planning
            |  → Alex presents capacity model showing 8 sprint-weeks for narrowed scope
            |  [confidence: high]
            |
2026-03-12  |  Search Capacity Decision
            |  → 8 sprint-weeks committed; priya-cfo signed off after Q1 overrun context addressed
            |
2026-03-26  |  Search Vendor Risk Review
            |  → Algolia licensing concern surfaced; timeline commitment paused pending investigation
            |  [!] new risk not present in earlier meetings; blocks ship-date
```

### Themes

#### Scope discipline held [confidence: high. consistent across 3/5 meetings]

Autocomplete + filters appeared IN in every scope-test moment. Saved searches appeared IN at kickoff, OUT from Feb 5 onward. Decision held through 2 subsequent capacity conversations without reopening.

- 2026-01-15: proposed IN (kickoff)
- 2026-02-05: saved searches DEFERRED to v2; autocomplete + filters held
- 2026-03-12: scope reconfirmed implicitly in capacity decision

#### Capacity model as anchor [confidence: high. referenced in 4/5 meetings]

Alex's capacity model emerged on Feb 19 and was referenced as the authoritative capacity artifact in every subsequent meeting. The model's credibility came from having the specific tradeoff math ("cutting saved searches saves 3 sprint-weeks").

- 2026-02-19: introduced
- 2026-03-12: referenced to anchor the 8-sprint-week commitment
- 2026-03-26: referenced to confirm vendor risk does not change capacity (only timeline)

#### Vendor-licensing as late-emerging risk [confidence: medium. appears in 1/5 meetings, recency gives weight]

Algolia licensing concern surfaced only on Mar 26, late in the quarter. Alex referenced a prior email from Algolia that had been sitting unreviewed since March 15. Suggests a pattern: external-risk signals arriving mid-cycle that the team lacks a routine to triage.

- 2026-03-26: first surfaced; tied to email dated 2026-03-15

### Stakeholder position tracking

**priya-cfo** (CFO)

- **Position evolution**: skeptical-of-feasibility → cautiously-aligned → committed-with-monthly-review
- **Key statements**:
  - 2026-02-05: "can Q2 realistically absorb search on top of Q1 overrun?"
  - 2026-03-12: "willing to commit if we have a monthly-review mechanism"
- **Alignment state**: aligned (with conditions)

**maria-cpo** (CPO)

- **Position evolution**: scope-supportive from the start (consistent)
- **Key statements**:
  - 2026-01-15: "autocomplete + filters align with the product vision"
  - 2026-02-05: "deferring saved searches to v2 is the right call"
- **Alignment state**: aligned throughout

**alex** (engineering lead)

- **Position evolution**: capacity-concerned → capacity-confident (after model)
- **Key statements**:
  - 2026-01-15: "we need to see the tradeoffs before I can commit capacity"
  - 2026-02-19: "the model shows 8 sprint-weeks is feasible for the narrowed scope"
  - 2026-03-26: "vendor licensing is a new risk we need to handle before I can commit a date"
- **Alignment state**: aligned, but pragmatic about new risks

### Consolidated decision list

| Date | Decision | Context | Meeting | Confidence |
|------|----------|---------|---------|------------|
| 2026-01-15 | Initial scope: autocomplete + filters + saved searches | Kickoff proposal | Search Scope Kickoff | high |
| 2026-02-05 | Defer saved searches to v2 | Scope review | Search Scope Review | high |
| 2026-02-19 | Capacity model: 8 sprint-weeks for narrowed scope | Capacity planning | Search Capacity Planning | high |
| 2026-03-12 | Commit 8 sprint-weeks for Q2 | CFO signoff received | Search Capacity Decision | high |
| 2026-03-26 | Defer ship-date commitment pending vendor-licensing review | Vendor risk surfaced | Search Vendor Risk Review | high |

### Contradiction flags

**[!] Initial scope vs. narrowed scope** (resolved)

- **2026-01-15** (Search Scope Kickoff): scope included saved searches
- **2026-02-05** (Search Scope Review): saved searches deferred to v2
- **Status**: resolved by the Feb 5 decision; not a live contradiction, noted for history

No live unresolved contradictions in this time range.

### Open items and stalled threads

- **Algolia licensing terms review** (maria): surfaced 2026-03-26; blocks Q2 ship-date commitment. Not a stalled thread yet (only one meeting), but timeline-critical.
- **Capacity-model documentation as reusable artifact**: referenced 4 times across meetings, never formally documented as a project-level artifact. Would benefit teams beyond search feature.

### Narrative summary

Q1 search-feature planning converged on scope and capacity through a disciplined sequence. The kickoff proposed autocomplete, filters, and saved searches; a February scope review deferred saved searches to v2, and that decision held across subsequent capacity conversations. Alex's capacity model, introduced in mid-February, became the anchor artifact. referenced in every subsequent meeting and credited with giving priya-cfo the confidence to commit 8 sprint-weeks on March 12 (after the Q1 overrun context was addressed).

The one outstanding question is vendor-licensing, which surfaced only on March 26. Alex referenced an Algolia email from March 15 indicating potential query-volume limits. The team correctly paused on a ship-date commitment pending investigation, but the two-week gap between the Algolia email arrival and its meeting-surfacing suggests a gap in how external-vendor risk signals get routed to active planning.

Going into Q2, the team has scope and capacity committed, but not a timeline. The Algolia investigation is the critical path; once resolved, a short follow-up meeting can commit the ship date. The broader pattern worth capturing: the capacity model's role as an anchor artifact is reusable, and the vendor-signal-triage gap is a process improvement the team can adopt for other initiatives.

### Prioritized follow-up suggestions

**[High priority]**

- Schedule vendor-licensing resolution meeting within 2 weeks: maria completes Algolia investigation; if limits apply, assess whether negotiable or hard. Blocks Q2 timeline commitment.
- Document the capacity model as a reusable artifact: alex publishes the model format in a shared location; referenced by search feature and available for other initiatives. Reduces rework for future capacity conversations.

**[Medium priority]**

- Build a routine for external-vendor risk signal triage: the March 15 Algolia email sat for 11 days. A weekly scan of vendor-comms for at-risk initiatives would catch signals earlier. Alex to propose a mechanism.

**[Lower priority / monitor]**

- Stakeholder alignment pattern: priya-cfo's "willing to commit with monthly-review" approach worked well here. Consider whether this pattern should generalize to other cross-org commitments.

---

## Sources & References

### Primary inputs (source meetings)

- 2026-01-15_14-00EST_search-scope-kickoff_recap.md (2026-01-15). input quality: high
- 2026-02-05_14-00EST_search-scope-review_recap.md (2026-02-05). input quality: high
- 2026-02-19_14-00EST_search-capacity-planning_recap.md (2026-02-19). input quality: medium (partial notes; no transcript)
- 2026-03-12_14-00EST_search-capacity-decision_recap.md (2026-03-12). input quality: high
- 2026-03-26_14-00EST_search-vendor-risk-review_recap.md (2026-03-26). input quality: high

### Referenced artifacts

- Prior syntheses on this topic: none (first synthesis)
- Related project briefs: 2026-01-12_search-feature-brief.md (planning-phase brief)

### External references

- Alex's capacity model: [capacity-model-q2.xlsx](https://sheets.example/q2-capacity)
- Scope draft: [search-scope.md](https://notion.example/search-scope)

### Generation context

- **Generated**: 2026-04-02T10:00:00Z
- **Skill version**: 1.0.0
- **Input quality**: high. 4 of 5 recaps at high quality, 1 at medium; no low-quality sources
- **Overall confidence**: high. decisions consistent across sources; stakeholder positions have multiple attestations
- **Known gaps**: Algolia licensing terms themselves not yet reviewed (only the fact that limits may apply). Depth of vendor-risk impact is medium-confidence until maria completes investigation.
- **Scope filter**: project=search-feature
- **Format hint**: default (full synthesis; user did not request board-prep / onboarding / retro-input / exec-brief variant)
