scope: client-account - This is a Rye Valley delivery decision about how the JOLT! team communicates a production issue to a client. The client (Josh) is not a Rye Valley decider.
- Date: 2026-10-07
- Decider(s): Michael Houck, Tatem Lindner
- Status: decided
Decision
Proactively disclose to Josh (JOLT! client) that his voice profile was missing from the initial scripts, framing it as a software context bug in the internal tooling. Michael will message Josh’s Slack channel directly, tag Tatem to follow up, and reassure Josh that the issue is fixed and new scripts are being delivered. The message will not characterize the scripts as AI-written.
Context
Josh’s contact Melissa sent Tatem a batch of Claude-written scripts because the initial JOLT! scripts “didn’t sound like him.” On review, Tatem discovered Josh’s voice profile was never incorporated when the scripts were first generated (Hermes voice card not created for that client). Tatem handled diplomatically without pointing out the internal error. Michael decided it was better to disclose proactively to preserve trust and avoid Josh believing the team misunderstood him in the initial intake calls.
Options considered
- Say nothing / just fix it: Risk of Josh thinking the team fundamentally misread him in two onboarding calls.
- Full disclosure as software bug (chosen): Honest, preserves confidence in the team’s understanding of Josh, frames it as a new-tool issue rather than a writer’s mistake.
Consequences
- Michael messages Josh’s Slack channel Oct 7 (apologizes, reassures, tags Tatem).
- Tatem posts in Josh’s channel confirming scripts are fixed and new batch is coming today.
- New scripts generated with complete voice profile, sent same day.
- Going forward: voice card creation is a required onboarding step before first script batch.
Related
- Meeting: [Weekly] JOLT! Sync - Oct 7, 2026