Teammates step — a per-building company picks buildings per invite
And every other company never learns the control exists. This frame is the second half.
16 Sept 2026 · branch lane-a-teammates-buildings · captured against propflow-stage · at f7305679f5
Data note. Every name and balance below comes from propflow-stage, which is anonymized by construction (ADR-0097/0110 — phones in the impossible +1000 NPA, emails @example.test). The identical capture against prod would carry real tenants' names and balances and is not safe to attach anywhere, which is why the generator refuses to run against one.
1 · No operating model resolved — no picker, and no property read either
An anonymous capture resolves no session, so the wizard layout never reads an Organization row and operatingModel is null — the same state a company with no row, a row older than the field, or a failed read lands in. The step treats all of those as not per-building: this decides a building grant, so the narrow answer is the safe one.
What to look at is what is not here: no buildings control under the row, and no “no buildings yet” line either. The network tab is the other half — /api/properties is never called, because the picker is not rendered-then-hidden, it is not rendered.
Asserted in the captured DOM — Add your team · Finish. The step renders normally; the buildings control is absent rather than empty.
Why the per-building frame is not here, said plainly
The per-building picker is not photographed, and this artifact will not pretend otherwise. Reaching it needs a signed-in admin of a company whose Organization.operatingModel is per_building_team AND who has not finished onboarding. Neither identity this capture tool signs in as qualifies: the smoke account is platform_admin, which the wizard layout redirects to /dashboard, and the seeded non-staff identity is already onboarded, which redirects too. Minting a third identity, or flipping an existing company's operating model, is a data write — a larger and less reversible act than the missing picture.
What covers it instead is in the PR: five DOM cases drive the real component with the real shape and assert the wire. A centralized company and an unknown one are each proven to render no control and to make no property read; a per-building one is proven to render the picker, to exclude test properties from it, and to post propertyGrant: 'listed' with exactly the ticked ids — and, ticking nothing, to post neither field, which is the case the invite route would 400 if it were sent as an empty list. Those are behaviours, not pixels, and they are the ones that can be wrong silently.