When we describe the experience of using a product or tool, our vocabulary must be that of the manifest image—i.e., capable of adequately capturing first-personal experience and thought—and not that of the scientific, or any others that are only capable of producing sideways-on views.
So for example, we mustn't talk of the 'OODA,' or Observe, Orient, Decide, Act loop, which characterises the discrete, formally defined action patterns of computational systems, but of seeing, perceiving, (judging) and acting.
An alternative then: Pond is a tool for understanding insofar as it coordinates the development of lines of inquiry that are implicit in/constitute our research and collection practices by augmenting the perception-synthesis loop.
Another desire Pond aims to satisfy: I'd like to be almost reckless with my hypercuriosity (flexible, non-linear, divergent thinking), but I want to end these sessions with the sense that something has occurred, my understanding has developed. Pond is watching and offering (not imposing) structure.
Imagine walking around a museum or gallery or exhibition and tossing what catches your interest into a cart that's trailing you and the steward of the cart suggesting how each might relate to your ongoing interests (including whether there's a new line of inquiry coalescing that's worth exploring).