Appointment data from WebChart: five work-list asks that are one missing input
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100
- Issue type
- Feature
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Activity status
- Active
- Tech stack
- typescript
Research direction
Start with the feedback-call entry in docs/JOURNAL.md and ROADMAP §7.12–7.14, then resolve the MIE questions about FHIR Appointment and Slot access, the authoritative PCP field, and WebChart access. The work is ready to split only after those inputs are confirmed; done means the read-path scope and any separate write-path issue are defined without guessing.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
Raised at the pilot practice's 2026-09-10 feedback call and never filed; recorded in docs/JOURNAL.md (2026-09-10, the feedback-call entry) and as ROADMAP §7.12 on 2026-09-15.
Five asks, one dependency
Each of these was asked separately, and none of them can be designed without the same missing input:
- See a patient's upcoming appointments on their row / profile.
- Branch the work list between "prep for a visit already booked" and "reach out to someone with none" — a different action for each, which is the actual workflow the practice runs.
- Make "prep" create an encounter, rather than a WorkWell-side task.
- Schedule onto the provider's own calendar from the gap.
- Add an encounter from a card.
Asks 3–5 additionally need a write path (#7.13 / its own issue); asks 1–2 need only the read.
What is needed from MIE
- Are appointments reachable over FHIR —
Appointment, and what a bookableSlotlooks like — or only through a WebChart-specific surface? - What is the authoritative PCP field?
Patient.generalPractitioneris the obvious candidate and has never been confirmed. This overlaps #556: the live WebChart directory currently attributes every patient to one hardcoded provider, so panels cannot work on live data at all. - Developer eSIM / WebChart access, so any of this can be verified rather than guessed (ROADMAP §7.14).
Why it is filed now with nothing built
Two of the five (1 and 2) are pure read-path features that would ship quickly once the data exists, and they are the highest-value part of the practice's work-list feedback. Filing keeps them from being re-discovered a third time. Nothing here is actionable on our side until the questions above are answered — the honest state is blocked, named, rather than absent.
Related: #556 (PCP attribution on live data), ROADMAP §7.12–7.14.
- Dominant language
- TypeScript
- Stars
- 0
- Forks
- 0
- Avg merge
- 6h 6m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 69
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from Taleef7/workwell
-
documentation owner-ops
Difficulty 1/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 86/100
-
owner-ops
Difficulty 1/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 85/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 76/100
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 35/100
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 38/100
All issues in Taleef7/workwell
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 84/100
Eynzof/Hermes-CN-Desktop#610 ·
-
bug clawsweeper:linked-pr-open clawsweeper:needs-live-repro clawsweeper:no-new-fix-pr impact:message-loss issue-rating: 🐚 platinum hermit P2 regression
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
-
enhancement
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
-
calcite-components needs triage refactor
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 75/100
Esri/calcite-design-system#15203 ·
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 78/100
fullcalendar/fullcalendar#8106 ·