Viewing Results

Interpret latest and historical Data Validation outcomes, including status badges and trend context.

This page covers Data Validation check detail and history views. For dashboard-based validation widget results, see Validation Widgets in Dashboards.

What you see on the page

There are two high-level result views used for quick status checks:

• Project page Data Validation widget: compact check cards in the project page for quick scanning.
• Checks page cards: check cards with score, status, trend hint, and scoped model count.

Practical review flow

These high-level views are a KPI heads-up layer for rules defined by your team. Use them to spot drift quickly, then drill into a specific check for detailed analysis.

When you open a check result page, you typically see:

• a top-level check score and status (aggregate across all models in scope)
• a per-rule list showing pass/warn/fail outcomes
• expandable rule rows to inspect logic flow (WHERE → CHECK) and counts at each step
• model cards for each model included in the check scope
• latest run details (time, model/version context)
• historical trend for previous runs
• an object-level detail table for investigation, including passing and failing objects

Selecting View result on a model card opens that model’s detailed result, where you can inspect the rule-by-rule breakdown, the light 3D viewer, and the data table. Use the table and viewer together: selecting failing (or passing) rows focuses the matching objects in the viewer for triage.

Threshold authoring: Checks — Thresholds and status.

Result states

Status	Meaning
PASS	Pass-rate ≥ configured pass threshold.
WARN	Between warn/pass band when configured.
FAIL	Below thresholds.
PENDING	Evaluation still running, or no completed rollup exists yet for that rule/run context.

The top section is the aggregate result for the check across all models in scope. Only error severity rules drive the overall score; info rules still appear in the breakdown.

If a result looks unexpected

1. Open latest check result

   Start with current check score and top failing rules.

2. Drill into failing rules

   Expand a rule to inspect its logic flow (WHERE and CHECK) and step-by-step counts. Rule-level viewing also populates the object table with pass/fail rows so you can inspect individual objects directly.

3. Compare with history

   Confirm whether failures are regressions, recurring debt, or resolved trends.

4. Share and coordinate

   If external coordination tooling is used, include BCF export in handoff.

Before you retune rules, confirm:

1. The result used the model and version you expected.
2. Predicates or thresholds have not changed since the baseline snapshot (create a new check if you need different behaviour).
3. Failures cluster by model or timeframe (data drift) versus looking like sporadic noise.

Model and version context

Plans cap how many models attach. Every row references explicit version ids plus trigger and timestamp—carry that context when debating trends.

Coordination handoff

BCF export from a validation result packages failing objects into topics with viewpoints so coordinators can triage outside Speckle. Use it when your issue workflow expects BCF; it does not replace fixing property data in the authoring tool.

FAQ

Why does a rule show PENDING?

PENDING appears when evaluation is still running in the background, or when no completed evaluation exists yet for that rule/run context.

Can warning thresholds be customized?

Yes. Warning and pass thresholds can be configured globally and per rule in the authoring flow. See Thresholds and status.

Should I use latest only or history only?

Use both. Latest helps with immediate action; history helps with governance and trend confidence.