Ticket 31369 - Damage ticket already had enough evidence for replacement review

• automation_draft_weakness: The automation defaulted to asking for missing damage photos even though the customer description said photos were attached and the public support team later treated the transit damage as sufficiently evidenced.
• manual_reply_improvement: Matt moved straight to a replacement path, which was faster and more useful once the damage was judged clear enough from the existing ticket evidence.
• new_drafting_rule: For fresh shipping-damage tickets, do not assume photos are missing just because the text field is noisy or attachment visibility is imperfect. Check whether the description explicitly says photos were attached or whether the damage is already clear enough for Matt to approve a replacement path.
• confidence_effect: Improves ticket-reading and send-guardrails for damage/replacement drafts, but still keep photo requests when evidence is genuinely absent or ambiguous.
• storage_decision: reviewable learning proposal

Evidence

• Automation private note 12385641119
• Matt public reply 12385648696

Why this matters

Repeatedly asking for already-provided damage evidence slows down obvious replacement cases. The draft should first distinguish "attachments not surfaced cleanly to the automation" from "customer truly did not provide evidence."