title: "Judge — "Is the quality sufficient?"" source: "tasks/TFW-46__evidence_layer/phase-c/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: docs Verify findings: verify.md
Universal Checklist¶
| # | Check | Status | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DoD met? | ✅ | All 4 AC items verified against actual files (verify.md V1-V5). AC-1: 5 glossary terms present + TD-2 fixed. AC-2: 6 adapter pairs byte-identical (hash verified). AC-3: VERSION = 0.8.8. AC-4: CHANGELOG [0.8.8] entry with correct structure |
| 2 | Philosophy aligned | ✅ | P4 (domain-agnostic): glossary terms contain no domain-specific examples — verified in V5. P2 (honest incompleteness): DEFERRED/BLOCKED defined as explicit statuses in Evidence Status Vocabulary |
| 3 | Tech debt documented | ✅ | RF §6 Observations: 1 item (compilable_contract.md stale ref — repeated from Phase A obs #1, still unfixed). Quality observation: executor correctly noted it's pre-existing |
| 4 | Style & standards | ✅ | Glossary entries follow established pattern (h3 heading + 2-3 line definition + cross-reference). CHANGELOG follows Keep a Changelog format. File naming follows conventions |
| 5 | Observations collected | ✅ | 1 observation — compilable_contract.md L69 stale reference. Real issue (already tracked as TD-117) |
| 6 | RF completeness (§7-9) | ✅ | §7 Fact Candidates: "No fact candidates." §8 Strategic Insights: "No strategic insights." §9 Diagrams: "No diagrams." All present (empty content valid for a documentation/sync phase) |
| 7 | Evidence completeness | ✅ | TS has 4 AC items, all with Evidence: N/A (appropriate — glossary is definition document, adapter sync is mechanical, version/changelog is documentation). RF §5 has 7 VERIFIED items. Executor went beyond TS requirement by providing inline evidence despite N/A plan |
Mode-Specific Checklist (docs)¶
| # | Check | Status | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Content quality | ✅ | Glossary terms are clear, accurate, and match conventions.md §3 Evidence Sections definitions. CHANGELOG entry coherently summarizes all 3 phases. No ambiguity |
| 8 | Source verification | ✅ | Glossary cross-references verified (conventions.md §3, templates/TS.md §5, handoff.md Step 11, templates/review/verify.md, templates/review/judge.md). CHANGELOG references TFW-46 phases accurately |
Contradictions with KNOWLEDGE.md¶
| # | Knowledge item | RF claim | Contradiction? |
|---|---|---|---|
| — | No contradictions found | Phase C is documentation/sync — no architecture decisions or structural changes | — |
Checkpoint¶
Self-check: - [x] Every checklist item has evidence (not just ✅/❌)? - [x] Referenced verify.md findings in DoD assessment? - [x] Checked RF §7-9 for presence AND quality (not just existence)? (Empty content valid for docs/sync phase) - [x] KNOWLEDGE.md cross-referenced — contradictions documented or "None"? - [x] Fact Candidates from RF reviewed — any that need challenge? (No fact candidates — appropriate for a mechanical phase)
Stage complete: YES