Our agreed pre-shipment check names the housing samples and finger set. The clip shows an arm moving, without package identity or a clear pickup. I have asked for a linked demonstration of our order, not a claim that any FR10 moving is evidence about our tooling.
Restate the agreed demonstration as a sequence that links the package identity to the fitted tooling and actual sample handling. Include preparation and release, not only movement while something is already held. That gives them a specific missing deliverable to answer.
A replacement clip now shows the package labels and fitted fingers continuously through pickup and release of the identified housings. The operator presents a prepared tray. It does not show how that preparation was done.
Our agreed process starts with the housings in their incoming containers, so the prepared tray leaves work unexplained. I have kept the useful linked handling evidence and asked who prepares it, by what method and with what allowance.
Then the new clip answers the identity and handling question but not the complete workflow. Ask for the omitted preparation to be shown against the same sample condition; it should not inherit approval just because the later transfer is now visible.
And make that missing work visible to whoever books the operator's time, Isaac; otherwise the clip can become fully automatic in a planning summary while your preparation question is still open