experiment: replace landing with workshop introduction

- Added Welcome card (Before we begin) to idle state
- Reduced textarea from 10 to 6 rows
- Added reassurance text below Analyse button
- Removed redundant empty-state placeholder
- Closed Experiment 03 (Partially confirmed) in evolution log
- Added Experiment 04: Facilitated Workshop Introduction
- Added Entry Experience section to UX guidelines

.claude/ux-guidelines.md

@@ -322,3 +322,17 @@ Headings should be clean. Remove unnecessary subheadings that duplicate context.
 Cards should have consistent border radius, padding, and heading treatment across the workspace.
 
 An Investigation Map Preview should look provisional — lighter borders, muted text, subtle background — so the user knows it is a preview rather than completed content.
+
+## Entry Experience
+
+The landing page is not the investigation workspace.
+
+The landing page welcomes the user.
+
+The landing page explains what will happen.
+
+Complexity appears progressively.
+
+Users begin with observations rather than conclusions.
+
+The Confidence Engine behaves like a facilitator introducing a workshop — calm, patient, and focused on understanding before acting.

components/scenario-form.jsx

@@ -377,27 +377,49 @@ export default function ScenarioForm() {
   return (
     <div className="space-y-6">
       {status === "idle" && (
-        <form onSubmit={handleSubmit} className="space-y-4">
+        <form onSubmit={handleSubmit} className="space-y-6">
-          <textarea
+
-            ref={textareaRef}
+          {/* Welcome introduction */}
-            value={scenario}
+          <div className="rounded-lg border border-gray-100 bg-gray-50/60 px-6 pt-5 pb-6">
-            onChange={(e) => setScenario(e.target.value)}
+            <h2 className="mb-3 text-sm font-semibold tracking-wide text-gray-500 uppercase">Before we begin</h2>
-            placeholder="Describe the scenario you want analysed..."
+            <p className="text-sm leading-relaxed text-gray-700 mb-4">
-            rows={10}
+              The Confidence Engine helps build confidence by understanding situations before deciding what to do.
-            className="w-full rounded-lg border border-gray-300 px-4 py-3 text-sm focus:border-gray-500 focus:outline-none focus:ring-2 focus:ring-gray-400"
+            </p>
-          />
+            <p className="text-sm leading-relaxed text-gray-700 mb-3">
-          <div className="flex items-center justify-between">
+              You do not need to know exactly what the problem is.
-            <span className="text-xs text-gray-400">
+            </p>
-              {scenario.length}/{MAX_LENGTH}
+            <p className="text-sm leading-relaxed text-gray-700">
-            </span>
+              Simply describe what you have observed. We will work through it together, one question at a time.
-            <button
+            </p>
-              type="submit"
-              disabled={!scenario.trim()}
-              className="rounded-lg bg-gray-900 px-6 py-2.5 text-sm font-medium text-white transition hover:bg-gray-700 disabled:cursor-not-allowed disabled:opacity-40"
-            >
-              Analyse
-            </button>
           </div>
+
+          {/* Scenario input */}
+          <div className="space-y-2">
+            <textarea
+              ref={textareaRef}
+              value={scenario}
+              onChange={(e) => setScenario(e.target.value)}
+              placeholder="Describe the scenario you want analysed..."
+              rows={6}
+              className="w-full rounded-lg border border-gray-300 px-4 py-3 text-sm focus:border-gray-500 focus:outline-none focus:ring-2 focus:ring-gray-400"
+            />
+            <div className="flex items-center justify-between">
+              <span className="text-xs text-gray-400">{scenario.length}/{MAX_LENGTH}</span>
+              <button
+                type="submit"
+                disabled={!scenario.trim()}
+                className="rounded-lg bg-blue-700 px-6 py-2.5 text-sm font-medium text-white transition hover:bg-blue-600 disabled:cursor-not-allowed disabled:opacity-40"
+              >
+                Analyse
+              </button>
+            </div>
+          </div>
+
+          {/* Reassurance */}
+          <p className="text-xs italic text-gray-400">
+            You do not need all the answers yet.
+          </p>
+
         </form>
       )}
 
@@ -509,14 +531,6 @@ export default function ScenarioForm() {
         </div>
       )}
 
-      {/* Empty state */}
-      {status === "idle" && (
-        <div className="rounded-lg border border-dashed border-gray-300 bg-gray-50 px-6 py-8 text-center">
-          <p className="text-sm text-gray-400">
-            Enter a scenario above and click Analyse to begin.
-          </p>
-        </div>
-      )}
     </div>
   );
 }

docs/design-evolution-log.md

@@ -198,7 +198,64 @@ Map
 Separating these should make the interface feel more like a facilitated investigation than a collection of cards.
 
 Evaluation:
-Pending visual review.
+Partially confirmed.
+
+Learning:
+
+The workspace feels more coherent when organised into cognitive zones rather than a simple document stack.
+
+However, another distinction emerged that is more important than the zones themselves.
+
+The interface naturally separates into two different modes:
+
+• the active conversation between investigator and facilitator
+
+and
+
+• the shared workspace describing the current understanding.
+
+Unexpected learning:
+
+History feels incorrect when treated as reference information.
+
+History is actually the continuation of the investigator's conversation.
+
+Every response immediately becomes history.
+
+The notebook should therefore grow naturally from the Response area.
+
+The Investigation Status card currently competes with the Current Investigation card.
+
+The current question is the primary focus.
+
+Status is supporting context.
+
+Decision:
+
+Keep the cognitive-zone concept.
+
+Refine the zones around conversational flow instead of card grouping.
+
+Next question:
+Can the workspace clearly separate conversation from shared understanding?
+
+### Experiment 04 — Facilitated Workshop Introduction
+
+Hypothesis
+
+Beginning with a facilitator-style introduction will create more confidence than presenting an empty workspace.
+
+Questions
+
+- Does the interface feel more welcoming?
+- Does reducing the visual weight of the textarea improve the first experience?
+- Does separating "starting" from "investigating" feel natural?
+- Does the transition into the investigation workspace feel meaningful?
+
+Status:
+Experimental.
+
+No conclusions.
 
 ---