Read the evidence
Read the Round 0 evidence bundle the engineers read, and state what it lets you claim to a customer.
Evidence reading
Read the negative space before the findings
Every claim you would make names the evidence beneath it and that evidence’s limit.
Sibling repository../payments-validation-fixture836a75dShared with course 301. You work from specs/product/payments.md rather than the diff.
Why this stage exists
Product and engineering are calibrated here, against one artifact. The bundle is identical. The question asked of it is not.
A clean run is not a result until someone types it. Six evidence types support six different sentences, and only one of them is proof.
What you start from
Work from these inputs only. Anything not on this list is either a later stage’s concern or a decision you do not own.
- Evidence bundle
- The Round 0 JSON produced by workbench validate.
- Acceptance contract
- Your criteria from stage 3, with their evaluation paths.
- The workbench
- Six evidence types and the characteristic misreading of each.
Read the negative space before the findings
One worked pass, so the shape of the work is visible before you do it on your own.
- Read notExamined before you read findings.
- Match each finding to the criterion it settles, or to nothing.
- Type each result: counterexample, proof, statistical, opinion or silence.
- Write the customer-facing sentence each result actually supports.
What this turns onA clean property run over 500 generated sequences supports "no violation found in what we explored." It does not support "refunds are idempotent."
Do the work
- Complete the evidence reading for Round 0.
- Write the sentence you would put in a release note, then the sentence you could defend.
- Find the criterion nothing in the bundle settles.
- Do not soften a limitation to make the sentence read better.
You produce
Evidence reading
- Criterion
- Evidence
- Type
- Claim it supports
- Claim it does not support
Challenge your own result
Marketing wants "duplicate refunds are now impossible." Can you sign that?
Show how this resolves
No. The evidence supports no violation over the sequences explored, on an in-memory database. "Impossible" is a proof claim and nothing in the bundle produces one. Offer the sentence the evidence supports.
Ready to continue when
- Every claim names the evidence beneath it and its limit.
- At least one criterion is recorded as unsettled by this bundle.
What transfersType the evidence before you weigh it, whatever produced it.
Source · 06 Process and ceremonies