CLAUDE WATERMARK REMOVER · DESTINATION TEST
Does taking a preview with splice leave cleaned rows intact?
No. In this test splice returns the preview and removes it from the original array. Slice returns a preview without that mutation.
What the test establishes
The cleaner preserves both line records. A downstream preview first uses slice and then splice on the same array. The second call removes the first row, leaving only b for a later export. The apparent missing line comes from collection mutation after cleaning rather than from newline handling.
Reproduce the observation
Save tested-app.js and reproduce.cjs together, then run node reproduce.cjs. Compare its output with the recorded observation. The harness executes the actual homepage callback in a minimal DOM and records its resulting field values and method calls. Destination operations run in Node.js; the homepage DOM is a controlled substitute. Runtime: v24.22.1. No submitted text or genuine Claude output is used.
{
"cleaned": "a\nb",
"safe": [
"a"
],
"preview": [
"a"
],
"remaining": [
"b"
]
}Capability boundary
The fixture uses LF-separated text without quoted multiline fields. It is not a CSV export test. A shallow slice also does not deep-clone nested row objects.
This Claude watermark remover edits a small selected character set. These callback observations do not establish authorship, detector scores, statistical-watermark removal or end-to-end browser behavior. For real work, keep the original and compare the exact result at its destination.
Primary material and next step
The tested first-party source snapshot and complete harness are the primary material for this page. For broader scope, read invisible Unicode versus AI watermarks, or return to the cleaner.