| name | artefacted-revision-report |
| description | Write replayable adversarial review notes into the active artefact folder so later Miadi, RISE, and wiki waves can resume from concrete evidence instead of chat memory. |
Artefacted Revision Report
After a review wave, write a markdown report into the active artefact folder when one is available.
Report purpose
The report should let a later session answer three questions without re-reading the whole conversation:
- what was reviewed
- what evidence was checked
- what must change before promotion
Required sections
Scope reviewed
Evidence paths
Desired outcome reconstructed
Current reality observed
Strongest disagreements found
Revision actions
Blocked promotions
What may advance with conditions
Next wave starting point
Quality rules
- Prefer exact file paths and quoted claims over paraphrase.
- If a conclusion depends on missing evidence, say that explicitly.
- Separate what is proven from what is inferred.
- Preserve the promotion status used in the review (
BLOCK, HOLD, or ADVANCE WITH CONDITIONS).
Suggested filename
Use a durable, scope-specific name such as:
adversarial-review--<scope>--<yyyymmddhhmm>.md
If the wave already asked for a specific report path, use that instead.