What Flows just did
Based on your request to build Build a Login Page with Auth Metrics Tracking, Flows created 9 implementation stages and 45 checks.
You asked for: Build a functional login page with real authentication, validation, error handling, and analytics events for key auth metrics so the app owner can measure user behavior around access and conversion.. Flows generated 9 stages because the application requires Create a login page with email and password inputs; Implement real authentication against the app's auth provider or backend; Support login success and login failure states. Each stage tells your AI builder what to do, tests whether it actually worked, and gives a repair instruction when it fails. These checks are designed to catch: Building a login form that looks complete but does not authenticate against a real backend or auth service; Tracking metrics only in console logs without storing or sending them anywhere testable; Redirecting after login without actually persisting the authenticated session.
Example failure
The form reported success, but no database record was created.
What Flows does
Flows detects the failure, generates a repair instruction, reruns the test, and stores the passing evidence.
Stages — Plan → Build → Test → Fix → Prove → Ship
9 stages · 45 checks · progressive disclosure — open a stage for details
Copy to external builder
Copies a prompt for Claude/Cursor/etc. Records prompt_copied only — not execution, commits, or checks.
Execute through Oort
Requires Sign in with Oort + a provider connection (BYOK). Keys stay on Oort. A model name in the dropdown is not the same as a live connection.
Next
Check off: Auth provider or backend path is identified
Add a proof note on each check — a checkbox alone is weak proof.
Probes & advanced tools are under “More verification tools”. Experience level: Settings.
Project (saved with proof)
Project binding: Unbound — complete project binding before trusting this run · missing repositoryUrl, repositoryStartCommit, environment, stack
More verification tools (probes, timeline, adapters)Show
App persistence (create → read → assert token)
Body template: {"probe":"{{token}}","title":"flows-probe-{{token}}"}. Needs CORS-readable public create/list endpoints (or inconclusive). Badge only when create→read→refresh finds the token (detects false success).
Two-account authorization (User B cannot see/change User A)
Authorization evidence source: Cross-account ownership test (trust level 5/6). These are not equivalent. Unauthenticated probe alone is weaker (source: unauthenticated API probe). Tokens stay in this browser session only — not uploaded to Flows servers.
Generated edge-case tests (review / approve)
- api_probe Submitting the form empty is rejected with a clear error
- api_probe Each required field can be omitted and fails validation
- api_probe Malformed email is rejected
- api_probe Malformed phone is rejected when phone is collected
- api_probe Duplicate submission does not create two records
- api_probe Double-click submit creates only one record
- false_success_probe Failed request does not show success
- browser_automation Refresh during submission does not leave corrupt state
- api_probe Oversized input is rejected
- api_probe Unsafe strings do not execute or break storage
- api_probe Logged-out users cannot open protected pages
- api_probe Protected API rejects requests without credentials
- api_probe Expired session cannot mutate data
- browser_automation Logout in one tab invalidates mutations from another
- cross_account_probe User B cannot see or change User A’s data
- cross_account_probe Participant cannot call coach/admin endpoints
Generated from this route’s signals — you approve; you do not invent security tests.
Content probe (GET body contains text)
In-product content probe reads response text when CORS allows — not full DOM/click automation. Playwright script is optional and external.
Proof strength
thin · 0/100
Heuristic from notes + probes + gates — not a production certification.
Verification adapters
- ● Deploy URL probe · idle
- ● API path probe · idle
- ● Authz probe (unauth → 401/403) · idle
- ● Browser persistence · idle
- ● App persistence (create→read) · idle
- ● Content / body text probe · idle
- ○ In-product Playwright DOM · not embedded (download external script)
Filled circles = available here. Empty = not shipped. Probes are not a production audit. Adapter docs
Step 1 of 9
Not startedDefine the auth flow and metrics schema
Establish exactly what the login system must do and what metrics need to be captured before implementation starts.
If your stack already has auth or analytics packages, tell the builder to use them instead of inventing new ones.
Flows keeps plan, checks, failures, and next steps connected
Your AI tool writes or changes the code
Repository grounds the plan only after inspect
Checks always carry a validation tier
How this plan was created
Plan from project details
Flows creates steps using the goal, requirements, stack, platform, and details you provide.
- Project description
- Selected template / route
- User-entered stack
- Constraints and notes
- Build a Login Page with Auth Metrics Tracking
No repository inspection implied. Connect and inspect a codebase to ground steps in real files.
Codebase access
Checking GitHub…
Or paste a repository URL manually
Use these instructions in Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Emergent, or another builder.
Review this project and produce an implementation plan for a real login page with authentication and metrics tracking. Identify the current stack, existing auth provider if any, routing structure, protected pages, and available analytics or database options. Define the auth flow from page load to login success or failure, and list the exact events to track: login_page_view, login_attempt, login_success, login_failure, logout, and unauthorized_redirect. For each event, specify required fields such as timestamp, email or masked identifier when appropriate, failure reason, route, and session or user id if available.
Project context
Copies the project goal, technical details, current step, previous progress, and checks so your AI tool understands what it is working on.
Expected after this step
A concrete implementation plan listing auth flow steps, route protections, and the exact analytics events and data fields to record.
Should not happen
- ✕Building a login form that looks complete but does not authenticate against a real backend or auth service
- ✕Tracking metrics only in console logs without storing or sending them anywhere testable
- ✕Redirecting after login without actually persisting the authenticated session
- ✕Showing generic success states even when auth requests fail
Verify gate — prove this step works before continuing
Do not move on until every check is true. Add proof notes — a checked box alone is weak proof. Checks are manual by default; deploy/API probes live under “More verification tools” and do not auto-check boxes.
Do not continue if…
- !Building a login form that looks complete but does not authenticate against a real backend or auth service
- !Tracking metrics only in console logs without storing or sending them anywhere testable
- !Redirecting after login without actually persisting the authenticated session
- !Showing generic success states even when auth requests fail
- !Leaving protected routes accessible because route guards were not implemented
Repair path — if this step fails
Use the Repair Prompt when a verify gate fails. Loop: Detected → Diagnosed → Repair issued → Changed → Retested → Resolved
Show repair prompt textShow
Your previous response was too generic. Re-inspect the actual project structure and give me a specific implementation plan based on the current stack, files, routes, auth method, and where metrics events will be stored or sent. Do not describe a mock example.
Your notes for this step
Definition of Done
Final route-level requirements. Manual checks — separate from per-step verify gates. Completing step gates does not auto-check these. Route completion is not a production-ready claim.