Review Workspace

Review the consequence-bearing action, not merely the narrative around it.

Never convert absence of evidence into favorable evidence.

Preserve “unknown” as an unresolved state until evidence closes it.

Authority must be valid for the exact action and cannot be inferred from access alone.

Continuity must survive across identity, evidence, authority, context, and dependencies.

A later correction must not silently overwrite the record that was originally reviewed.

Every finding must identify the failed condition and the consequence of leaving it unresolved.

Findings and source records remain distinct until an attributable disposition is preserved.

A reviewer may recommend a determination but may not fabricate the facts required to support it.

ALLOW is not the default; it is an earned and bounded determination.

HOLD is a protective state when a remediable condition remains unresolved.

DENY is appropriate when the route is prohibited, materially false, or outside recoverable scope.

ESCALATE is appropriate when authority, consequence, ambiguity, or conflict exceeds reviewer scope.

Severity reflects consequence exposure, not reviewer preference.

Confidence must be stated separately from severity.

Competing interpretations must be preserved when evidence does not settle the dispute.

Every material change after review requires renewed correspondence testing.

The earliest failed runtime link should be identified before downstream symptoms are analyzed.

Corrective action must name the owner, evidence required, due condition, and revalidation boundary.

Closure means the finding has a preserved disposition; it does not guarantee the route is admissible.

Replay must reconstruct what the reviewer knew, when they knew it, and what version they inspected.

Independent challenge is part of governance, not an interruption of governance.

Credentials prove bounded competency; they do not replace evidence for a specific execution.

No admissible evidence. No admissible execution.