@tomako/tools-runtime 0.1.0

package/src/i18n/messages/en/tools/user-interview-record-generator.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,244 @@
+const userInterviewRecordGenerator = {
+  meta: {
+    title: "User Interview Record Generator",
+    description: "Turn one interview transcript into a traceable evidence record with behavior, quotes, pain costs, alternatives, buying signals, missed follow-ups, and review checks.",
+    intro: "Do not stop at meeting notes. Split the transcript into evidence your team can trace back to source text and reuse in the next interview or decision review.",
+    category: "User research tools",
+    keywords: [
+      "user interview notes",
+      "interview notes generator",
+      "customer interview analysis",
+      "interview transcript analysis",
+      "user research record",
+    ],
+    inputSignal: "One interview transcript",
+    outputSignal: "Structured evidence record",
+    boundarySignal: "Research draft; review source transcript",
+  },
+  examples: [
+    {
+      label: "Indie developer transcript",
+      input: "Paste a transcript about how an indie developer prepared launch design materials.",
+      expectedOutput: "Return participant context, recent behavior, workflow, pain costs, alternatives, buying signals, quotes, and missed follow-ups.",
+    },
+  ],
+  guide: {
+    workspaceHeading: "Turn one interview into a traceable evidence record",
+    workspaceHint:
+      "Paste one interview transcript or detailed notes. Tomako extracts reviewable evidence: behavior, pain costs, alternatives, buying signals, quotes, missing information, and next follow-ups.",
+    workspaceBadge: "After the interview",
+    outputs: "Evidence extracted from the transcript",
+    outputItems: [
+      {
+        title: "Behavior timeline",
+        body:
+          "Prioritize the participant's latest concrete experience instead of turning the interview into a generic summary.",
+      },
+      {
+        title: "Pain and cost",
+        body:
+          "Break 'it was annoying' into time, money, rework, delay, risk, or emotional cost with confidence.",
+      },
+      {
+        title: "Alternatives and workflow",
+        body:
+          "Capture the tools, templates, services, or manual process the participant uses today.",
+      },
+      {
+        title: "Missed probes and review checks",
+        body:
+          "Mark what was not explored deeply enough and which claims need source transcript review.",
+      },
+    ],
+    supportHeading: "Turn a conversation into research material",
+    supportItems: [
+      "You completed a real interview and have a transcript or detailed notes.",
+      "You want a reviewable evidence record, not generic meeting notes.",
+      "You need to separate quotes, behavior, inference, and next follow-up questions.",
+      "You are collecting multiple records before synthesizing cross-interview insights.",
+    ],
+    unsupportedHeading: "Which text should not be structured directly",
+    unsupportedItems: [
+      "It does not replace audio transcription, privacy redaction, research ethics review, or team review.",
+      "It cannot decide that a product is worth building from one interview.",
+      "Do not submit confidential customer data, sensitive personal information, or unauthorized recordings.",
+      "If the transcript is too short, test text, or contains no participant answers, the page blocks submission.",
+    ],
+    failureHeading: "How weak evidence is handled",
+    failureItems: [
+      "If task submission fails, your input stays in place so you can retry.",
+      "If the backend does not return a structured result, the page shows the task id for debugging.",
+      "If the backend returns a result for another tool or the structure does not match, the page will not display a fake success state.",
+      "If evidence is missing, the result leaves arrays empty and lists the gap in missingInfo instead of inventing details.",
+    ],
+    resultUseHeading: "How to review and hand off the record",
+    resultUseItems: [
+      "First compare quotes, pain cost, buying signals, and participant profile against the source transcript.",
+      "Move missed follow-ups into the next interview guide so future interviews go deeper.",
+      "Only use evidence with concrete behavior and cost in decision materials.",
+      "After 5-10 records, use the insight report generator to synthesize patterns.",
+    ],
+    whyTomakoHeading: "Why this is not ordinary meeting notes",
+    whyTomakoItems: [
+      {
+        title: "Evidence-first structure",
+        body: "The output is organized around source evidence and does not treat polite feedback as a strong conclusion.",
+      },
+      {
+        title: "Research boundaries stay visible",
+        body: "Missing information and review checks remain visible so the team can return to the transcript.",
+      },
+      {
+        title: "Connects the research workflow",
+        body: "The guide, one-interview record, and multi-interview report can work as one research chain.",
+      },
+      {
+        title: "Less manual reshuffling",
+        body: "Pain, alternatives, buying signals, and follow-ups are split into stable fields for reuse.",
+      },
+    ],
+    standardHeading: "What a good interview record should separate",
+    standardItems: [
+      "Facts, quotes, inference, and follow-up questions should be separate.",
+      "Missing evidence should be marked as missing instead of filled in.",
+      "Pain needs cost, context, and a trigger, not only a sentiment.",
+      "The result must be copyable, reviewable, handoff-ready, and tied to a task id.",
+    ],
+    faq: "FAQ",
+    faqItems: [
+      {
+        question: "Can this tool upload audio?",
+        answer:
+          "Not in this version. Use a meeting or transcription tool first, then paste the text here for structuring.",
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Can one interview produce a conclusion?",
+        answer:
+          "No. One record is best for improving the next interview. Repeated patterns across several records are better for opportunity and priority decisions.",
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Will it preserve participant quotes?",
+        answer:
+          "It extracts high-value quotes, but you should still compare them with the source transcript so context is not lost.",
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Does the result need human review?",
+        answer:
+          "Yes. Pay special attention to buying signals, pain cost, participant identity, and private information.",
+      },
+    ],
+    ctaPrimary: "Generate insight report",
+    ctaSecondary: "Back to interview guide",
+    ctaHint:
+      "After you structure several records, synthesize cross-interview insights, opportunity maps, and next experiments.",
+    heroVisualAlt:
+      "Illustration of a researcher turning interview recordings, transcript pages, and highlighted quotes into evidence notes.",
+    supportVisualAlt:
+      "Illustration of a transcript, participant context, and research goal organized into one interview record.",
+    failureVisualAlt:
+      "Illustration of thin notes without real participant answers being marked as needing stronger evidence.",
+    resultUseVisualAlt:
+      "Illustration of a product team reviewing highlighted quotes against the source transcript.",
+    standardVisualAlt:
+      "Illustration of facts, quotes, inferences, and missed follow-ups separated into evidence piles.",
+    hero: {
+      label: "Transcript to evidence",
+      cards: ["Extract real scenarios", "Preserve key quotes", "Mark missed probes"],
+      signals: ["Pain cost", "Alternatives", "Buying signals"],
+    },
+  },
+  widget: {
+    formTitle: "Interview text",
+    formHint:
+      "Paste one interview transcript or detailed notes. Do not submit private, confidential, or sensitive personal information.",
+    transcriptLabel: "Interview transcript",
+    transcriptPlaceholder:
+      "Paste one interview transcript. Example: Interviewer: Tell me about the last time... Participant: I launched...",
+    advancedTitle: "Additional context",
+    advancedHint:
+      "These details help the result tell evidence from interview background.",
+    productContextLabel: "Product / research context",
+    productContextPlaceholder:
+      "e.g. validating a launch design asset generator for indie developers.",
+    researchGoalLabel: "Interview goal",
+    researchGoalPlaceholder:
+      "e.g. understand tools, time cost, pain, and buying signals around launch assets.",
+    participantLabel: "Participant context",
+    participantPlaceholder:
+      "e.g. indie developer who shipped a Mac menu bar app in the last 2 months.",
+    generate: "Generate interview record",
+    generating: "Structuring",
+    reset: "Reset",
+    copy: "Copy Markdown",
+    copied: "Copied",
+    workspaceVisualTitle: "Preserve source evidence before writing judgment",
+    workspaceVisualBody:
+      "The preview shows highlighted quotes, pain evidence, and follow-up gaps. The result is a research record your team can check against the source, not a meeting summary.",
+    workspaceVisualAlt:
+      "Workspace illustration with an interview transcript, highlighted quotes, and structured evidence record.",
+    workspaceVisualItems: ["Submit transcript", "Extract evidence fields", "Check, render, and copy"],
+    status: {
+      idle: "Waiting for input",
+      submitting: "Submitting",
+      running: "Tomako is structuring",
+      awaitingResult: "Waiting for structured result",
+      done: "Result ready",
+      error: "Needs attention",
+    },
+    resultPendingTitle: "Structuring the interview record",
+    resultPendingHint:
+      "Tomako is extracting evidence, gaps, and review checks. Keep this page open.",
+    resultReady: "Structured record",
+    taskId: "Task id: {taskId}",
+    participantSnapshot: "Participant snapshot",
+    interviewContext: "Interview context",
+    recentBehavior: "Recent behavior",
+    workflow: "Tools and workflow",
+    painPoints: "Pain and cost",
+    alternatives: "Alternatives",
+    buyingSignals: "Buying / adoption signals",
+    quotes: "High-value quotes",
+    strongSignals: "Strong signals",
+    weakSignals: "Weak signals",
+    missedFollowUps: "Missed follow-ups",
+    openQuestions: "Open questions",
+    missingInfo: "Missing information",
+    reviewChecklist: "Human review checklist",
+    confidence: "Confidence",
+    noEvidence:
+      "The transcript does not contain enough evidence for this field. Review the source or ask in the next interview.",
+    fieldErrors: {
+      transcript:
+        "Paste a real interview transcript with concrete participant answers, situations, or behavior. Do not use test text or one vague sentence.",
+    },
+    errors: {
+      validation: {
+        title: "Paste a fuller interview transcript",
+        body:
+          "The text needs concrete participant answers, scenarios, or behavior. Test text, numbers, and very short content are blocked.",
+      },
+      submitFailed: {
+        title: "Task submission failed",
+        body: "The generation task was not created. Keep your input, retry later, or check the task service.",
+      },
+      taskFailed: {
+        title: "Generation task failed",
+        body: "The task failed and there is no structured record to display. Use the task id to inspect logs.",
+      },
+      resultTimeout: {
+        title: "Result wait timed out",
+        body: "The task may still be running, but the page did not receive a structured result within the wait window.",
+      },
+      wrongResultType: {
+        title: "Wrong result type",
+        body: "The backend returned a result for another tool, so the page will not display it as a success.",
+      },
+      invalidResultSchema: {
+        title: "Invalid result structure",
+        body: "The backend returned a result, but it did not match the page's renderable structure.",
+      },
+    },
+  },
+} as const;
+
+export default userInterviewRecordGenerator;