Who judges single-panel arrival? I'd like that question answered independently of the signal that says the tool has a seal.

And don't reduce support to whether the panel drops. A panel can arrive bent, dragged or badly seated while still having stayed attached to the tool.

Quality and the integrator have agreed a supervised trial scope with representative stacks, independent arrival checks and panel-condition inspection; the supplier's seal indication will be recorded separately.

Does that scope include an uncertain arrival, or only checking the successful transfers afterwards?

Imran's point affects the handover. If the process cannot establish what arrived, the operator needs the reviewed hold and escalation route, not a prompt to trust the vacuum indication and carry on.

Also retain any awkward stack sample through revisions. It would be easy to return with a better-looking demonstration made from freshly separated panels and lose the condition that mattered.

The supervised trial is complete: a pickup lifted two panels, while the seal indication looked normal; the independent arrival check caught it and the trial was held under the agreed procedure.

That rejects seal-as-count for this trial. It doesn't tell you how to separate the sheets, but it is an actual result, not a request for another nicer video.

What happened to the panel-condition assessment on that double pickup? I would keep the observed support and surface condition with it, even though the count criterion already failed.

Quality retained both panels and recorded edge contact marks from that event; the supplier is revising its concept against the same stack conditions, with no purchase approval from us.

Record that the independent check caught the event in the supervised trial, not that every future double pickup will be detected

Agreed, and the report states that limit; the original concept has not met the trial criteria, while the proposed replacement still needs a reviewed test before we can discuss a normal-operation handover.