Backbrief$79 once
Back to the run

Run record 4 of 5· fictional client

The verifier record

content/diy-fixture/fixture-run/05-verifier-record.md· rendered unmodified from the file

Verifier record: F2 decision memo (fixture run, fictional)

Filed verbatim by the orchestrator on 2026-09-10 at about 05:05 EDT from the verifier's return; the verifier role has no write tool by design. The record is the verifier's; the orchestrator changed no word of it.

Artifact: 04-decision-memo.md. Criteria: F2 row and Scope in 02-03-plan-unit.md. Source: ../fixture/fixture-brief.md. Both fresh-context-verification and stop-slop passes ran.

Verdict: PASS, with one CONFIRMED fix the builder should apply before the memo is called done (it does not fail a named criterion; it is a cited claim the source does not make).

Criteria

  • Under 700 words: PASS. Manual wc-style count 676 including markdown tokens and table pipes; about 610 prose words. No shell available, so no mechanical count.
  • Three options incl. doing nothing: PASS (A, B, C).
  • Numbers trace to brief lines: PASS (ledger below).
  • Evidence tagged owner-stated / assumption / unknown: PASS.
  • Risks and reversibility per option: PASS.
  • One recommendation with reasoning: PASS (Option A, line 39).
  • Closing GO/NO-GO request: PASS (line 45).
  • No real client data; first line states fictional: PASS (line 1).
  • Plain prose, no em or en dashes, American spelling: PASS (grep clean).
  • Responds to Scope, not a different request: PASS; produces no referral plan or product.

CONFIRMED

  1. Line 36: "one accountant is the only lead source (lines 8-9)". Brief lines 8-9 say four of six cleanups came from that accountant, so two came from elsewhere. The cite does not support "only". Severity medium; fix the wording.

PLAUSIBLE

  1. Line 26: "converting at the same 4-of-6 rate" reframes a share of cleanups by source as a referral conversion rate. Tagged assumption, but a client could read it as a measured rate.
  2. Lines 34, 39, 42: the $500 ad budget is assigned to Option B as if the brief tied it there. Brief line 12 states the $500 independently of either path. The recommendation at line 39 leans on this untagged allocation.
  3. Lines 3, 8, 45: "90 days" appears three times with no line cite (brief line 10 states it).
  4. Line 14: "lines 12-13" for the spreadsheet template and PDF checklist; both sit on line 13 only.

Claim ledger

Memo lineNumberBrief lineHolds
12, 16, 21$900 flat, $250/month7yes
12, 22, 36, 39six cleanups, four months, four from one accountant8-9yes
16, 23, 28, 34, 42, 4515 hours/week9yes
8, 14, 24, 27$79/month11 (cited 10-11)yes
25, 34, 39, 42, 45$500 ads12yes
14one-page PDF13 (cited 12-13)yes, loose
3, 8, 4590 days10, uncitedtraces, no cite
52026-09-10, F2metadata, not a brief figuren/a

Stop-slop

Score 37/50. Notes, not blockers: adverbs at lines 16 ("exactly", "roughly"), 26 ("deliberately"), 36 ("Fully"); passive at 34 ("are sunk") and 36 ("is committed").

Scope not checked: no independent page render; word count is manual. This record was produced without access to the builder's reasoning or drafts.

Disposition (orchestrator, after the record)

CONFIRMED 1 applied: "the only lead source" rewritten to "the main lead source, four of six cleanups". PLAUSIBLE 3 and 4 applied in part as cite corrections (90 days cited to line 10 at its first use in the decision statement, not at the two later mentions; the template and checklist cited to line 13). PLAUSIBLE 1 and 2 left as recorded for the owner's judgment; the handoff names them.