Evidence-Backed Review

Core principle. Every finding cites what you observed. Every axis you did not inspect is named.

• A review that inspected nothing reads like a review that found nothing. Only the first line of the report separates them.
• The weight sits in Verify before critiquing and Finding eligibility. Everything else routes to them, or reports what they produced.
• You opened this in the middle of something. This is how to do that work, not a replacement for it.

The request sets the floor

Write the request down as the task list before matching a single row. One item per thing it named, in its words. Rows from the table below are added to that list, never substituted for it.

• A list built from this gate answers this gate. Six things were asked for and the table has ten rows, so a list built from rows is complete and wrong.
• Everything the request named is owed back by name, each one found or each one reported as not inspected. An axis it named with no rule here is still owed.
• Read the list again before the report. By then the range, the diff and ten rules have been in front of you, and those six things have not.
• Cheap evidence crowds out what matters. A local run is one command away and a pipeline is not, so the near one gets cited and the far one dropped. Distance is not a reason, and a green suite says it ran, not that the change was worth making.