FE-1558: Fuzzy-search prototypes for the ad-hoc scenario form

[kube]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Stacked on #9371. Four playable Storybook prototypes for fuzzy-finding parameters, Variables, and places in the ad-hoc scenario form, layered over the real form with a large generated fixture, so the interaction patterns can be compared and one picked.

🔗 Related links

• FE-1558 (internal)
• Base PR: FE-1518: Optimization constraints as shared HIR expressions #9371

🔍 What does this change?

Everything lives under src/ui/dev/form-search-prototypes/ (Storybook-only, nothing ships; see its README). Open Dev / Form Search Prototypes:

• A · Command palette — ⌘K overlay with a ranked, kind-chipped, match-highlighted list; Enter jumps: scroll, focus (focus is selection in the worksheet model), amber flash on the landing trigger.
• B · Filter in place — a persistent box that dims every non-matching row, keeping matches in their spatial context, with an honest "n of m names match" count.
• C · Quickfind — / opens a browser-find bar; Enter/Shift+Enter cycle the focus flash through matches while the bar keeps the keyboard; Escape hands focus to the current match.
• D · Outline rail — a permanent grouped index beside the form with a filter on top; doubles as a map of the model.
• Shared, unit-tested core: an fzf-style fuzzy scorer (word-start/consecutive bonuses, with a feasibility guard so a camelCase anchor cannot strand the rest of the query) and a name index whose entries carry the form's real adHocTargetLabel aria-labels, so jumps resolve against the actual triggers.
• The harness mounts the REAL AdHocScenarioForm (live LSP + Monaco) with a generated bottling-plant fixture: 18 parameters, 12 Variables, 12 places, per-place variables.

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

• does not modify any publishable blocks or libraries, or modifications do not need publishing

Files sit inside @hashintel/petrinaut but are Storybook-only (no shipped entry point imports them).

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

The changes in this PR:

• are internal and do not require a docs change

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

The changes in this PR:

• do not affect the execution graph

⚠️ Known issues

• B's dimming is painted onto the rendered rows from outside the form (prototype-grade); a shipped filter would thread through the form's rendering instead.
• Jumps cannot enter collapsed places (the worksheet skips collapsed members); the fixture renders expanded, and a shipped version would expand on jump.

🐾 Next steps

• Pick a pattern (A and B compose well: one index, palette + in-place dimming) and decide where it ships — the form itself vs each host panel.

🛡 What tests cover this?

• fuzzy.test.ts (11 tests): subsequence matching, word-start preference and its feasibility guard, positions for highlighting, ranking, and the index's aria-label conventions against the big fixture.

❓ How to test this?

1. yarn exec turbo run dev --filter @hashintel/petrinaut and open Storybook (port 6006).
2. Open Dev / Form Search Prototypes, stories A–D.
3. A: ⌘K, type a fragment ("filltime", "breakroom"), Enter — the form scrolls and the landing cell flashes. B: type "rate" and watch non-matches dim. C: press /, type, Enter repeatedly. D: filter and click in the rail.

📹 Demo

Screenshots pending — placeholder for drag-drop.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview	Aug 30, 2026 6:08pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Aug 30, 2026 6:08pm
petrinaut-docs	Ready	Preview	Aug 30, 2026 6:08pm

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Aug 30, 2026 6:08pm

[semgrep-code-hashintel]

Semgrep identified an issue in your code:
Ensure that the regex used to compare with user supplied input is safe from regular expression denial of service.

To resolve this comment:

🔧 No guidance has been designated for this issue. Fix according to your organization's approved methods.

💬 Ignore this finding

Reply with Semgrep commands to ignore this finding.

• /fp <comment> for false positive
• /ar <comment> for acceptable risk
• /other <comment> for all other reasons

Alternatively, triage in Semgrep AppSec Platform to ignore the finding created by regex_dos.

_{You can view more details about this finding in the Semgrep AppSec Platform.}

[semgrep-code-hashintel]

Semgrep identified an issue in your code:
Ensure that the regex used to compare with user supplied input is safe from regular expression denial of service.

To resolve this comment:

🔧 No guidance has been designated for this issue. Fix according to your organization's approved methods.

💬 Ignore this finding

Reply with Semgrep commands to ignore this finding.

• /fp <comment> for false positive
• /ar <comment> for acceptable risk
• /other <comment> for all other reasons

Alternatively, triage in Semgrep AppSec Platform to ignore the finding created by regex_dos.

_{You can view more details about this finding in the Semgrep AppSec Platform.}