Menü
Use when a contested set needs rulings - court procedure (advocate/skeptic/risk-officer), evidence requirements, sequential fallback, and escalation rules.
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.
Basierend auf der SOC-Berufsklassifikation
Use during any Hyperworkflows delivery merge phase - single-merger protocol, MERGE_TOKEN lifecycle, full-suite gating, and revert-and-quarantine rules.
Use when rendering any Hyperworkflows result to a human - the mandatory report format with verified/unverified/quarantined+grey buckets, coverage arithmetic, and evidence links.
Use when a unit of work has no executable acceptance (no test, no verifiable output) and you need to construct one - golden files, property tests, metamorphic relations, snapshot tests - or prove it infeasible.
Use before building or auditing against acceptance contracts - systematically finds missing acceptance dimensions so "all green but wrong" cannot ship through contract holes.
| name | adjudication-protocol |
| description | Use when a contested set needs rulings - court procedure (advocate/skeptic/risk-officer), evidence requirements, sequential fallback, and escalation rules. |
Disputes are settled by executed evidence, not by argument quality.
Court composition (agent team, >3 contested items): advocate argues each item's strongest case; skeptic EXECUTES every repro command attempting to break the claim — armchair doubt does not count; risk-officer assesses blast radius and second-order effects. One shared task per item.
Evidence discipline:
runs/<run-id>/verdicts/task-<task-id>.json with the raw exit codes the skeptic observed. The TaskCompleted gate bounces completion without it.adjudicate.mjs), never voted on. The court's job is to produce better evidence, not consensus.Volatility discipline: teams have no resume. Timebox the court; flush every ruling to disk the moment it lands; a crash loses only the in-flight item. Degrade to sequential main-session adjudication reading the same files whenever teams are unavailable — announce the degradation once, without alarm.
Escalation: only items still genuinely ambiguous AFTER execution go to the human — presented with both sides' strongest executed evidence and a concrete question, never "what do you think?".