exeris-benchmarks-comparative-strict-gate-review

name	exeris-benchmarks-comparative-strict-gate-review
description	Comparative strict-gate review for exeris-benchmarks. Use on every PR making a cross-target comparative claim — verifies 4 gate artefacts present + `claim-status.json = comparison_eligible` + `track_id` consistent.

Exeris Benchmarks Comparative Strict-Gate Review

Purpose

Enforce: comparative runtime runs fail closed. Comparative math is valid only when claim-status.json = comparison_eligible AND strict gates pass. track_id is an isolation boundary.

When to Use

• Any PR making a cross-target / cross-protocol / cross-tier comparative claim.
• Any PR aggregating across track_id.
• Any PR running scripts/run-comparative.sh, run-entity-read-by-id-campaign.sh, run-e2e-shop-order-saga-campaign.sh, run-tls-matrix.sh, run-iso-budget-sweep-ab-ba.sh, run-full-triad-ab-ba.sh.

Required Inputs

• Comparative output directory.
• Stated claim (what is being compared, on what axis).
• track_id assignments per row.

Review Procedure

1. Artefact presence — confirm all four artefacts present:
   • stage7-gate-report.csv
   • stage7-gate-summary.json
   • claim-status.json
   • rejection-codes.json
2. Claim status — claim-status.json final status MUST be comparison_eligible. non_eligible → reject the claim (but non_eligible labelling itself is honest and OK).
3. Gate rows — every row in stage7-gate-report.csv should be pass. fail rows MUST have rejection_code populated; comparative math against fail rows is invalid.
4. track_id isolation — every aggregated row carries the same track_id. Cross-track aggregation is a hard reject.
5. Axis + track labelling — report outputs MUST include explicit axis labels (tier, protocol, family, comparison axis) AND the track label.
6. Run scripts — confirm scripts/validate-comparative-readiness.sh and scripts/aggregate-comparative-results.sh were used in the right order.
7. Decision and report — APPROVE / CONDITIONAL / REJECT.

Decision Logic

• APPROVE: All four artefacts present, comparison_eligible, gate rows pass, track_id consistent, labels present.
• CONDITIONAL: Sound run but missing one specific label / report stamp — propose the specific addition.
• REJECT: Missing gate artefact, non_eligible status, fail rows used in math, cross-track aggregation, missing labels.

Completion Criteria

• Artefact presence checked.
• Claim status confirmed.
• Gate rows audited.
• track_id isolation confirmed.
• Labelling confirmed.
• Verdict and remediation recorded.

Review Output Template

1. Scope analysed (comparative directory / claim)
2. Artefact presence (4/4 present?)
3. Claim status (comparison_eligible / non_eligible)
4. Gate rows (pass / fail count + rejection codes)
5. track_id isolation (consistent / cross-track aggregation)
6. Labelling (axis + track labels present)
7. Verdict (APPROVE / CONDITIONAL / REJECT)
8. Required actions (precise and minimal)

Non-Negotiable Rules

• Never approve a comparative claim without all four gate artefacts.
• Never approve a claim with non_eligible status as if it were eligible.
• Never approve cross-track_id aggregation.
• Never approve a comparative claim that bypasses scripts/validate-comparative-readiness.sh.