CLAUDE WATERMARK REMOVER · DESTINATION TEST
Why did my batch export lose its successful cleaned row?
Promise.all rejects when one job rejects; it does not return a partial result array.
What the test establishes
The successful job contains AB before the batch is assembled. The second job rejects with an explicit review error, and the catch branch receives that error instead of an array. This observation separates a batch coordination failure from a missing cleaner result. A workflow that needs partial success must explicitly define a record for each outcome rather than expect this operation to supply one. The source result is read again in the catch branch to show that rejection has not erased it. Neither job touches files or the clipboard, and no statistical watermark detector participates in this experiment.
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.
{
"error": "review failed",
"cleaned": "AB"
}Capability boundary
Two settled jobs are measured. Rejection does not establish cancellation of other work.
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.