---

title: "Judge — "Is the quality sufficient?"" source: ".tfw/templates/review/judge.md"

---

Judge — "Is the quality sufficient?"

Mindset: Judge. You have the evidence from Verify. Now rule on quality. Every ✅ needs proof. Every ❌ needs a specific finding. Test: "Would I stake my reputation on this passing production review?" Mode: {code / docs / spec} Verify findings: verify.md

Universal Checklist

#	Check	Status	Evidence
1	DoD met?	✅/❌	{reference verify.md §TS↔RF and specific items}
2	Philosophy aligned	✅/❌	{reference HL §7 Principles}
3	Tech debt documented	✅/❌	{RF §5 Observations present/absent}
4	Style & standards	✅/❌	{conventions followed? naming?}
5	Observations collected	✅/❌	{quality filter: are they real issues?}
6	RF completeness (§6-8)	✅/❌	{§6 Fact Candidates, §7 Strategic Insights, §8 Diagrams — present?}

Mode-Specific Checklist

{Copy items from mode file, fill with evidence}

Contradictions with KNOWLEDGE.md

#	Knowledge item	RF claim	Contradiction?

If no KNOWLEDGE.md exists or nothing applies: "No applicable knowledge items."

Checkpoint

Self-check: - [ ] Every checklist item has evidence (not just ✅/❌)? - [ ] Referenced verify.md findings in DoD assessment? - [ ] Checked RF §6-8 for presence AND quality (not just existence)? - [ ] KNOWLEDGE.md cross-referenced — contradictions documented or "None"? - [ ] Fact Candidates from RF reviewed — any that need challenge?

Stage complete: YES / NO