{
  "loop_name": "ship-a-draft",
  "evals": [
    {
      "id": "picks-the-generator-before-collecting",
      "prompt": "Run ship-a-draft on this Slack thread — I need something the exec team can read.",
      "assertions": [
        "Chooses the target generator (exec-summary) BEFORE running intake, because the brief is shaped for a target",
        "Runs brief-intake and tags every field explicit / implied / inferred / missing",
        "Runs doc-critique at G5 against the same rubric the generator was held to",
        "Runs output-hygiene last, only once the argument is settled",
        "Reports what output-hygiene did not touch"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "major-rewrite-returns-to-intake",
      "prompt": "The critique on my draft came back MAJOR REWRITE. Continue the ship-a-draft wrapper.",
      "assertions": [
        "Routes back to `intake`, not to `draft`, because G5's revise_to names intake",
        "Explains that re-drafting from the same incomplete brief reproduces the same gaps",
        "Does not run output-hygiene on a draft that is about to be rewritten"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "ship-a-draft-adr-from-thread",
      "held_out": "2026-11-04",
      "prompt": "Can you turn this Slack thread (slack-thread.txt) into a proper ADR for moving the nightly statements job? It goes to the architecture review group on Thursday and I want it finished and ready to send, not a first draft I have to fix up.",
      "assertions": [
        "Produces a structured intake brief from the thread before drafting, and the ADR is written from that brief",
        "The month-end queue capacity question Marta raised is carried into the brief and the ADR as open or a risk, not as settled",
        "The ADR records option B as the decision, option A as rejected because it does not fix the 3h40m runtime, and option C as rejected for lack of approved budget, and keeps the unchanged statement file format and idempotent retries as requirements",
        "After drafting, the ADR is critiqued with findings tied to sections and a G5 verdict in the critique's own terms (such as SHIP IT, SHIP WITH CHANGES or MAJOR REWRITE)",
        "Any changes the critique calls for are made before the polish pass, and the polish pass runs last, on the revised ADR",
        "The final ADR carries none of the thread's machine residue: no 'Generated with ExampleAI' or 'Summarised by ExampleBot' line and no 'Hope this helps' closer",
        "Does not invent figures, dates or owners not in the thread, such as a queue capacity number, a migration date or a deadline for Marta's check"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "ship-a-draft-announcement-unsettled",
      "held_out": "2026-11-04",
      "prompt": "Need the customer announcement email for scheduled exports, to go to Team plan admins. Everything's in the ticket (ticket-PRD-412.md). Marketing want final copy today so please give me something finished I can just hand over.",
      "assertions": [
        "The intake brief, written before any drafting, flags the launch date, the price, and whether SFTP delivery is in as unsettled in the ticket",
        "The draft leaves those three as clearly marked placeholders or open items instead of picking a value",
        "The critique gate does not return SHIP IT; its verdict holds the email back (such as SHIP WITH CHANGES or MAJOR REWRITE) and names the unsettled date, price and scope as the reason",
        "Tells the user plainly that the email is not ready to go to customers, and who in the ticket has to settle each item: Hannah and Oskar on SFTP scope and date, finance (Gwen, after the 10 November pricing committee) on price",
        "If the polish pass runs, the placeholders survive it, and the reply does not present the email as final copy",
        "Does not stop to ask questions; the brief, draft and critique are delivered in this run",
        "Does not invent a launch date, price or feature scope the ticket has not settled, such as stating 12 November, 26 November or $15 a month as fact"
      ]
    }
  ]
}