Export reviewed UI issues as structured JSON
A structured file for teams that want to control their own downstream handling.
Structured data is not a universal connector
An engineering team may want a review snapshot in a machine-readable form for internal tooling. Retick offers JSON issue export, but a file format alone does not establish a working integration or a stable contract for every downstream system. Review the content, inspect the downloaded shape, and validate any importer or script you build before using it on important records.
Prepare and inspect a JSON snapshot
Verify the issue content
Analyze supported media and compare proposed findings with the original evidence. For a file-upload retry problem, record the visible status and the intended recovery behavior. Add setup that the media cannot establish, such as the tested build and file conditions. Structured output does not turn an uncertain interpretation into a verified technical fact.
Choose the reviewed export selection
Keep approved defects separate from exploratory suggestions. Remove confidential values from descriptions before preparing material for another system. Decide which issues belong in this handoff and record the review context separately where needed. A downstream script should not have to guess which generated findings your product owner actually approved for implementation.
Download and inspect JSON
Choose JSON in the export flow, inspect the preview, and download the resulting file. Check actual keys, value types, optional fields, and evidence references rather than designing against an assumed schema. Parse the file with a proper JSON parser. Do not rely on key order or invent fields that the current export does not provide.
Validate your own downstream tooling
If you build an internal importer, test missing values, repeated imports, Unicode text, and destination requirements in a safe environment. Keep credentials outside the file and restrict access to evidence references. The downloaded JSON does not automatically create tasks, synchronize status, or execute code. Your team owns compatibility, error handling, and any later updates to its custom integration.
Control with clear responsibilities
Machine-readable snapshot
Use a structured format when your team needs to inspect data programmatically instead of scraping rendered review pages.
Control over handling
Decide which internal process receives the file and validate the destination's requirements rather than implying a universal connector.
Review before automation
Keep human approval upstream of your custom tooling so technical convenience does not promote uncertain findings into accepted work.
JSON handoff questions
Is this an API integration?▼
This workflow downloads a JSON file. A custom importer or other integration remains your team's implementation responsibility.
Can I assume a particular schema?▼
Inspect the current file and test your consumer against its actual shape. This page does not promise versioned compatibility for a custom downstream contract.
Will importing it repeatedly be safe?▼
That depends on your importer. Design duplicate detection and validation yourself instead of assuming a file download provides destination idempotence.
Prepare reviewed issues for structured export
Validate the content before building a downstream process.